Nasheman

India's largest selling Urdu weekly, now also in English

You are here: Home / Archives for Education

Scrap quota in higher education institutions: SC

by

Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court Thursday ruled that national interest requires doing away with all forms of reservation in institutions of higher education and urged the Centre to take effective steps “objectively”.

Despite several reminders to the central and state governments to make merit the primary criteria for admissions into super-specialty courses, the ground reality remains that reservation often holds sway over merit, observed a bench of Justices Dipak Misra and P C Pant.

“The fond hope has remained in the sphere of hope… The said privilege remains unchanged, as if (it is) to compete with eternity,” the bench remarked.

(Agencies)

No-detention till class 8, reviving tenth boards under review

by

smriti irani

New Delhi: A crucial day-long meeting of the highest advisory body on education began here today to consider reviewing the no-detention policy up to class 8 and reintroduction of class 10 board examination.

The meeting is being chaired by HRD Minister Smriti Irani, where the Women and Child Development Minister Maneka Gandhi suggested supplying of sanitary napkins in schools to reduce dropout rates among girls.

The suggestion was supported by several states and a commitment was given by the government at the meeting to implement it soon.

The meeting would also consider a proposal for extension of the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act up to class 10 in the secondary level and to nursery in the pre-school stage.

This is the first meeting of the newly reconstituted Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE) under the NDA government.

On the agenda would be discussions on the proposed new national education policy where the states’ participation is crucial.

State Education Ministers and secretaries along with academicians and nominated members of CABE are attending the meeting.

At the inaugural discussion, Irani laid emphasis on states’ participation in the framing the education policy while Health Minister J P Nadda underscored the need for inclusion of courses on health studies in the curriculum along with emphasis on pictorial content in study materials.

He also supported the suggestion of a few members for issuing health cards to students in schools.

The focus of the day-long meeting would, however, be on a report of a CABE sub-committee which had suggested review of the no-detention policy up to class 8.

The committee suggested to end the policy in a phased manner and reintroduce class promotion from class 5 onwards.

“We need to stop, re-assess and then move forward. At this stage, it would be prudent to reiterate the need for assessment of the learning outcomes and make it consequential by linking it to promotion or otherwise to the next class beyond grade 5,” the committee had said in its report.

A few states have already repealed the policy, which had come into effect with the implementation of RTE by bringing in necessary amendments to the state rules.

The RTE Act, which makes education a fundamental right of every child between the age of 6 and 14, came into effect on April 1, 2010. It requires all private schools, except for minority institutions, to reserve 25 per cent of seats for underprivileged children.

(PTI)

An Interview With Akhil Bharathan (Ambedkar-Periyar study circle, IITM)

by

Ambedkar-Periyar study circle

by Shreela, Venkat, Sathish and Alok, Sanhati

[Ambedkar-Periyar Study circle is an independent student body at IIT Madras which ever since its inception in 2014, has carried out a number of activities aimed at initiating discussions on socio-economic issues. These activities range from organizing seminars, discussions and distribution of Pamphlets. APSC was unilaterally de-recognized by the IITM administration after receiving a letter from MHRD. Akhil has been a member of APSC since the beginning and talks to us about a number of issues related to APSC and caste issues on IITM campus.]

Q: What was the idea behind Ambedkar Periyar Study Circle?

A: For many years IITM has had various student organizations based on Hindutva Ideology. One example is Vivekananda Study circle (VSC) which was founded in late 90’s. They have had talks which advocate Intelligent design and which claim the existence of Quantum Physics in Vedic Sciences. Such organizations have a complete support of IIT administration and they certainly play a role in making the environment in IITM very regressive. There is also little understanding of Caste based discriminations inside the campus. Keeping the dominance of such ideas in the campus in mind we thought of forming a collective which will introduce rationalist thinking in the campus and open up a dialogue on caste based issues which continue to plague Indian society.

Q: Can you tell us a bit about the History of APSC ?

A: APSC was founded in April 2014. In last one year we have conducted seminars on effects of genetically modified seeds on agriculture and environment, on Relevance of Ambedkar in contemporary society, A talk by Prof. Chaman Lal on the relevance of Bhagat singh in today’s society and a seminar on massive coal-bed Mithane Project in Tanjore district. We also held discussions on imposition of Hindi in campus and tried to make students aware about dangers of imposing vegetarianism in our society. I should also perhaps mention how we tried to counter an interference in the IITM campus from the MHRD(ministry of Human Resource and Development) which had sent a letter seeking action report to all the IITs regarding consumption of non-vegetarian food items on campus. We distributed pamphlets against this letter. The average audience in our talks is 30-40 people. We believe that even though our presence is rather limited on the campus, the awareness about our activities have slowly grown in past one year.

Q: Where does the funding of APSC come from?

A: In the initial stages, the members of APSC pooled their own money to start the circle. We now get some funding from other (non-member) students as well. In any case the funding is all completely from within campus. Our expenses are rather limited. Most of the time, our faculty advisor books a hall which is free of charge and we usually get our speakers from within Chennai, so only have to pay his/her commuting charges. By far the most expensive event for us was when we had a speaker from Dravidian University who spoke about Ambedkar and we had to pay his train fare . On this occasion, we even asked the audience for some donation to cover the cost.

Q: Were there any previous standoffs with the administration prior to the current issue?

A: There were no prior issues except that at the time of inception, the Dean of Student Affairs asked us to change the name to something else as he said Ambedkar Periyar Study Circle sounded “too radical”. After a rather lengthy discussion among the members of the circle, we decided to keep the name as APSC.

Q: So why this name?

A: Ambedkar and Periyar are two of the foremost social reformers in Indian History. The issues that they addressed and fought against are relevant even today. By discussing their ideas in the context of contemporary issues we aimed to establish a platform which would resist Hindutva Ideology. Our main aim is to increase the awareness of student population in the campus as regards caste , religious and economic issues.

Q: Can you tell us a bit about the institutional guidelines which student organizations in IITM have to adhere to?

A: Every independent student organization in IITM like APSC have a faculty advisor assigned to them. Every time we organize an event, we go and talk to the advisor. Sometimes he will give an input as to what kind of pamphlet should be prepared or notices be written etc. He then books a hall or auditorium for us.

Q: Where does the Dean of student affairs come in the picture?

A: He doesn’t.

Q: But it has been reported in the press that he was your faculty advisor?

A: No our faculty advisor, was and continues to be a faculty member from Humanities department (name withheld for consent reasons). We have been informing him of our activities and he has guided us on most occasions. Usually he forwards our requests and books the hall for our events. The Dean has appropriated the role merely to lay blame on us for not consulting and taking prior approval from him.

Q: Can you explain a bit about the guidelines which have been talked about in media a lot?

A: On 28th January, 2015 there was a set of guidelines passed by the SAC (Students Affairs Committee) , which however was amended by Dean of student affairs as he is also chairman of BOS (board of students) and it is within his rights to amend the guidelines. These amendments were proposed sometime in February.

Q: IITM has had student organizations for a long time, then what was the need to introduce guidelines in 2015?

A: Prior to 2015 the prerogative of recognizing or banning an organization was completely with the Dean. It was up to him to allow or disallow a student organization. However in 2014, when Chinta-bar (which is not a recognized student’s collective) organized a kiss of love event in the campus, the institute decided to introduce certain guidelines to keep various recognized organizations in check.

Q: So which among this amended guidelines is an issue according to IIT?

A: Dean of student affairs claim that we have used Institute’s name in one of our pamphlets which violates one of the guidelines.

Q: And what is your response to this accusation?

A: We reject this accusation on two counts. One, we have never used IIT’s name in any of our events. During the event under spotlight (in which it is claimed that we used IIT’s name) one of the lines in our pamphlet was that we are an initiative of IITM students. It is not clear to us how this implies we used IIT’s name to promote the event. I mean this is just trivially true! More importantly, organizations like Santhulan even used IIT logo in one their pamphlets (which was incidentally about a talk that opposed evolution and promoted idea of intelligent design). Even Vivekananda Study Circle hosts their site on IITM domain and also use IITM logo. However these organizations have not been de-recognised. Thus we do not think this accusation stands on any firm ground. Secondly, after we got the mail from the Dean of student affairs which informed us that APSC was temporarily derecognised, two of our members, Ramesh and Swaminathan went to see the Dean. They were told nothing about the guidelines issue and were just shown a letter from MHRD which asked what action was being taken against APSC for criticizing Modi government. Thus initially we were de-recognised due to the MHRD letter. It is only after MHRD denying any involvement in the issue, that IIT is now accusing us of not sticking to the guidelines.

Q: What is your understanding of this de-recognition and MHRD’s letter?

A: In our opinion, IITM has long been comfortable with presence of organizations which promote Hindutva Ideologies. Now we have a group which democratically protests against the importance of Sanskrit etc. The right wing organizations are increasingly uncomfortable. As far as MHRD’s letter is concerned I think it shows their paranoia. We are such a small group in one Institute and our membership count is below fifty, hence it is remarkable MHRD is concerned with our activities which are by the way completely democratic.

Q: Is this a de-recognition or a ban?

A: First of all I would like to say that this de-recognition is unjust and biased as I explained in the answer to the question above. Secondly, de-recognition means we cannot use Intra-net servers like Smail to invite students to an event. We cannot use notice boards to put up our notices, and we cannot book auditorium for any event. Hence it severely constrains our activities and is effectively a ban.

Q: How do you plan to oppose this de-recognition?

A: We do not even accept it! As I just said it is unjust and biased and based on an assertion which has no grounding. Thus we know that the de-recognition is to stifle any sort of dissent and critical discussions on the existing policies of the central government. We are demanding the following from the institute. An Immediate re-recognition of APSC, an unconditional apology from the Dean of student affairs for misuse of official powers, an unconditional apology from MHRD for it’s biased move and overturn the undemocratic code of conduct which is against article 19(A) of the constitution. We are also demanding that a commission be set up which investigate the use of IIT Madras funds which promote Hindutva activities inside campus.

Q: What has been the response of the student community on the campus?

A: Student community is highly divided on this issue. On one hand many students have approached us and expressed their solidarity but on the other hand the right wing organizations have been very vocal in their opposition ever since the issue flared up.

Q: Is there a caste problem on IIT campus?

A: When we started APSC, we received a number of hate messages on our Facebook page, written by students of IITM some of them stating Dalits should not even be there on campus. So yes I would say there is a serious caste issue on the campus. If we even look at the caste composition of the institute at various levels. According to a recent RTI, 87 percent of faculties are from forward caste. In last seven years only 3 ST students have been admitted to the MS program. I think this clearly shows the magnitude of the problem.

Q: What is the future of APSC?

A: Once we fight off this de-recognition, our aim in near future will be increase the number of activities in a given semester and increase the membership. Most importantly, we would like to keep the public discourse and debate alive on caste, communal and socio-economic issues.

Canadian government charged with 'cultural genocide' over indigenous schools

by

Truth and Reconciliation Commission report says historic government program was central in plan to ‘eliminate aboriginal people as distinct peoples’

Residential school children students in a typical classroom. An estimated 6,0000 of Canada’s indigenous children died in residential schools that failed to keep them safe from fires, protected from abusers, and healthy from deadly disease, a Commission report found. (Photo: Anglican Church Archives)

Residential school children students in a typical classroom. An estimated 6,0000 of Canada’s indigenous children died in residential schools that failed to keep them safe from fires, protected from abusers, and healthy from deadly disease, a Commission report found. (Photo: Anglican Church Archives)

by Lauren McCauley, Common Dreams

The Canadian government’s historic practice of forcibly removing Indigenous youth from their homes and sending them to “residential schools”—where tens of thousands were subjected to abuse, malnutrition, substandard education, illness, and often death—amounts to nothing short of “cultural genocide,” charged the country’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), which on Tuesday released its years-long investigation into the program.

The culmination of six years of research and 6,750 survivor and witness statements, the report argues that the Canadian government operated the school program with the explicit purpose of breaking children’s link “to their culture and identity,” and describes a “lonely and alien” existence, where students’ native languages and practices were suppressed and neglect and abuse were common.According to the report:

Buildings were poorly located, poorly built, and poorly maintained. The staff was limited in numbers, often poorly trained, and not adequately supervised. Many schools were poorly heated and poorly ventilated, and the diet was meager and of poor quality. Discipline was harsh, and daily life was highly regimented. Aboriginal languages and cultures were denigrated and suppressed. The educational goals of the schools were limited and confused, and usually reflected a low regard for the intellectual capabilities of Aboriginal people. For the students, education and technical training too often gave way to the drudgery of doing the chores necessary to make the schools self-sustaining. Child neglect was institutionalized, and the lack of supervision created situations where students were prey to sexual and physical abusers.

“These measures were part of a coherent policy to eliminate Aboriginal people as distinct peoples and to assimilate them into the Canadian mainstream against their will,” the report states. Further, the Commission argues that the government “pursued this policy of cultural genocide because it wished to divest itself of its legal and financial obligations to aboriginal people and gain control over their land and resources.”

Over the course of 150 years, an estimated 150,000 Indigenous children spent time in roughly 80 residential schools throughout the country. Approximately 80,000 survivors are still alive today.

The Commission lays out 94 calls for action, which it says are the “first steps” toward addressing the legacy of injustice and advancing the process of reconciliation.

Among the recommendations are efforts to protect child welfare, preserve language and culture, promote legal equity, and strengthen information on missing children. The report also emphasizes the important role that education can have in the healing process and calls for Canadian governments to work towards eliminating the education gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous children, as well as develop curriculum on residential schools.

“The children who attended these schools were severely punished for practicing their cultural ceremonies, for speaking their family’s language,” said TRC Commissioner Dr. Marie Wilson. “Reconciliation rests on building aboriginal culture back up, and preserving the languages and ceremonies that the schools tried to eliminate.”

The report also calls on governments across Canada to adopt and implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (pdf), which the Commission says will also help achieve successful reconciliation.

“One hundred years from now, our children’s children and their children must know and still remember this history, because they will inherit from us the responsibility of ensuring that it never happens again,” the report says.

The TRC was established in 2007 as a result of the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement.

Demoncrazy: Little girl arrested for protesting against Narendra Modi in Chennai

by

Police personnel detained this girl along with protesters. (Photo by: Solaris)

Police personnel detained this girl along with protesters. (Photo by: Solaris)

Chennai: In a shocking turn of events following the controversial ban on a student organization in Indian Institute of Technology, Madras, the police personnel detained a little girl for protesting against Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The incident has sparked outcry on social media wherein the shocking photos of the detained child is being circulated.

The girl was detained when she was raising pro-democracy and anti-Modi slogans along with the members of Students’ Youth Front and Thanthai Periyar group in Chennai.

The protests erupted after IIT-Madras derecognized an independent student body, Ambedkar Periyar Study Circle last week for creating awareness about the anti-people policies of Modi-led NDA government.

The protests were initiated by members of the Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI), and gradually other student organizations too joined them, condemning the alleged undemocratic action of Human Resource and Development Ministry of India.

The agitating members of the group shouted slogans against the Modi government and HRD minister Smriti Irani, while they were whisked away by the police personnel.

Meanwhile, IIT-Madras justified the ban and said that the student body was temporarily derecognized for “violating the guidelines of the institute”. While the agitating members claim that the move was based on a letter from the HRD Ministry, interfering in the matters of student groups within an educational institute.

The questions here are: Can a child be arrested in such a manner? Is Mr Modi seeing all this? Is staging protest a crime in India? Is India really a democratic country?

A police woman takes the girl to the police van. (Photo by: Solaris)

The girl joined the protesting members of the Radical Students’ Youth Front and Thanthai Periyar group. (Photo by: Solaris)

Police personnel detain members of the Radical Students’ Youth Front and Thanthai Periyar group. (Photo by: Solaris)

Police personnel detain members of the Radical Students’ Youth Front and Thanthai Periyar group. (Photo by: Solaris)

Police personnel detain members of the Radical Students’ Youth Front and Thanthai Periyar group. (Photo by: Solaris)

Police personnel detain members of the Radical Students’ Youth Front and Thanthai Periyar group. (Photo by: Solaris)

Full text of Arundhati Roy's statement in support of Ambedkar Periyar group de-recognised by IIT Madras

by

arundhati_roy

“What is it about a student organization, the Ambedkar-Periyar Study Circle (APSC) that frightened the Dean of Students of the IIT Madras enough for him to unilaterally ‘derecognize’ it?

The reason given is the usual idiotic red herring: “They were spreading hatred among communities”.  Another reason they were given, the students say, is that the name of their organization was considered to be too ‘political’. The same does not apply obviously to other student organizations such as the Vivekananda Study Circle.

At a time when Hindutva organizations and media outlets are outrageously celebrating Ambedkar the man who publicly denounced Hinduism, as though he is their very own man, at a time when the Hindu Nationalsts’ campaign of Ghar Wapsi (a revamped version of the Arya Samaj’s ‘Shuddhi’ program) has been launched to get Dalits to return to the “Hindu Fold’, why is it that when Ambedkar’s real followers use the name or likeness of Ambedkar they get murdered like Surekha Bhotmange’s family in Kahirlanji? Why is it that if a Dalit man has a ring tone on his phone with a song about Ambedkar he gets beaten to death? Why has the APSC been derecognized?

It is because they have seen through this charade and have put their finger on the most dangerous possible place. They have made the connection between Corporate Globalization and the perpertuation of caste. There is hardly anything more threatening to this present Ruling establishment than doing what APSC did—celebrating both Bhagat Singh and Ambedkar. This is what has brought them into the line of fire. This is what is sought to be quashed. Equally threatening is the VCK’s announcement about joining forces with the left and progressive Muslim organizations.

The de-recognition of APSC is a recognition of a kind. It is a recognition that it is absolutely right to make the connections it makes. And that many are beginning to make those connections”.

Our dissent against Modi govt and caste discrimination on the campus is being stifled: Ambedkar Periyar Study Circle, IIT-M

by

We would like to share the mail which members of Ambedkar-Periyar Study Circle sent to Dean and Director of IIT-Madras to explaining their stand on recent issue.

Ambedkar Periyar Study Circle

Sir,

We the students of Ambedkar-Periyar Study circle are writing you regarding our stand on the recent email that we received from the Dean of Students, de-recognized our students’ organization.

The mail from Dean of Students dated on 22/05/2015 says “because of the misuse of the privileges” given to your study circle (Ambedkar-Periyar study circle) as an independent student body, your student body is de-recognized by the institute. However it does not contain any details regarding the privileges misused by the APSC.

We resent the fact that the Dean has de-recognized our study circle unilaterally without giving us a fair hearing and an opportunity to represent ourselves. In our face to face interaction with the Dean of Students, we have been told that our study circle engages in “controversial activities” and violated the code of conduct of independent student bodies. We are clear on the stand that we have not misuse any privileges given by the institute. So far our activities are engaged with the healthy discussion on socio-economic issues on scientific basis to promote the scientific temper among the student which is allowed by the Indian constitution. We have not been given a satisfactory definition of what entails “controversial”. Further, we were asked to give assurances that we shall desist from such activities in the future before the Dean (Students) can allow us to restart our activities. We have also been asked to route all our activities through the Dean’s office rather than the usual practice of routing all our discussions, plan of activities and pamphlets through our faculty adviser. This excessive scrutiny is unprecedented and does not apply to any other students’ organization. Vis-à-vis this move of DoS clearly shows, only opinions put forth by the right wing group will get the consent to see the light of the day, while the voices and opinion of the democratic students like us will be curtailed hereafter. Since DoS chaired this position, two times he warned us to change the name “Ambedkar-Periyar” stating that it is polarizing the student. This shows the aversion of DoS towards the the name “Ambedkar-Periyar.”

The Dean’s office has provided us with a copy of a letter from the MHRD dated 21/05/2015with the ref no. F. No. 5-3/2014-TS-I. The letter stated that the MHRD has received serious complaints regarding the activities of our study circle through anonymous letter. A copy of one such letter was provided. We wish to respond to the allegations in the complainant’s letter.

  1. It has been alleged that we have spread hatred against the Modi government and a copy of our pamphlet on the occasion of Ambedkar Jayanti was enclosed. We do not see any merit in such a statement. We stand by our opinions. Yes, we were very critical of the government. However, we do not understand how dissent and criticism of the government’s policy is akin to “spreading hatred”. If any person professing an anti-establishment view is accused of engaging in “controversial” activities and all dissent is stifled, wouldn’t that be a violation of our constitutionally guaranteed rights to freely express ourselves? We feel that a vibrant and proactive civil society is an integral part of a healthy democracy. IITM itself have had many meetings that discussed the policies and legislation’s of the current and previous elected governments. Among them the reservation policy is the one which has not been still implemented in IITM campus. Here we want to raise a rational question on IITM’s stand on the reservation policy which is still an alive Government policy even in Modi Government since Independence. When OBC reservation was announced by then Govt., whether anti-reservation student group of IITM simply sat without commending because that its ‘government’s policy’ or it fought against it on the streets of Chennai with its tooth and nail to stop that move? What was the action taken by IITM towards those who fought on streets against the Govt. Policy on Reservation? Rather, the IITM took part in negotiating a raise of 24% to safeguard the vested interested of those anti-reservation body functioning in IITM?

  2. We have been accused of spreading hatred between SC-ST and the Hindus and vitiating the atmosphere of the institute. We are surprised and slightly amused. Are SC, ST not part of the so called ‘Hindus’? How MHRD and IITM is perceiving such a venomous anonymous mail with full of hatred towards the SC, ST and Ambedkar? Are we the one who polarise the students or they are the one who think IITM is their own base to propagate against the interest of SC, ST, OBC who are the majority in our Society? Rather our organization is engaged in propagating Ambedkar and Periyar thoughts, in helping depressed castes and the caste Hindus to realize the evilness of caste based discrimination taking place in modern India and expose the ideology functioning behind such discrimination. When we talk about the hierarchical caste structure existing in Indian Society, inevitably we end up in talking about the present pathetic condition of peasants and labours. There are a number of sociological studies that will bear us out when we say that caste based discrimination is still very strong in our society, that caste based associations can leave some with privileges that add up throughout their lives while those that are excluded face powerful social barriers to their attempts to improve their social and economic status. We have only been discussing these issues with an aim to make a common platform for all students in spite of their caste and creed so as to dismantle the evilness of caste barriers. However, even in 2015, our activities are seen to be too radical by the religious right. If the religious right has the right to be offended, then don’t the oppressed Dalits and Bahujans who still face powerful prejudices have a right to be offended with the state of affairs? Our pamphlets do not have any material that would surprise a sociological or political scientist. Yet, the institute has taken these complaints seriously and has chosen to derecognise our organisation. Any higher education institute should be a platform where critical thinking and dissent ought to be encouraged. Where brave new thoughts are nurtured. However, the “dangerous” ideas that we have been accused of spreading are at least a few decades old, if not a few centuries.

  3. The complainant has taken exception to one of our meetings which dealt with an MHRD circular regarding vegetarian and non-vegetarian mess halls. We do not understand how anybody’s sentiments could have been hurt when the entire discussion was about the right of every individual to decide what they can eat. This meeting could be seen as trivial when compared to the meetings on much larger issues. However, the complaint against this meeting indicates how unsparing the dominant establishment has become when it comes to stifling dissent. If such a trivial freedom such as being able to eat meat in the mess halls is seen as dangerous, then the continued existence of our study group becomes all the more important.

  4. Another issue that the complainant has taken exception to is a meeting that discussed language politics and the primacy given to Sanskrit and Hindi in the disbursement of central funds. We had a Linguist from HSS, IITM and a linguistic scholar from Pondicherry University who led the discussion. As rationalists, we feel that though Sanskrit has a valued place as part of culture and history of certain sections of our society, it is also an instrument of spreading a Brahminical, dominant narrative. Imposition of Sanskrit in school has less to do with teaching a language and more to do with the ideology behind teaching the language. We stand by our opinions and wish to assert our rights to profess our opinions freely.

  5. Finally, we have been accused of getting funds from the outside organization. This allegation is completely baseless and absurd. So far for all the programs the financial support had been taken from the study circle members’ own pockets and collected in paisas from IITM students at their doorsteps which was witnessed even by those who wrote the above said ‘anonymous pettition’. Why we had to collect in paisas from the students to conduct our events through a platform like APSC is because IITM rejected many of our moves to bring personalities like Prof. Chaman Lal through EML. Since its birth, EML is been the monopoly of religious right wing to propagate their metaphysical idealist ideology and is a platform for corporate think tanks in the scientific and academic fraternity. When the taxpayers money is been spend for propogating anti-people, anti-rational agenda, pro –people, rational groups like APSC have to collect money from the students to conduct its events. We are maintaining proper account for all our expenditures.

Our discussions, meetings and pamphlets are meant to kick start a discussion within the campus among the academic fraternity. The issues that we discuss are very important and define the way we live our lives. IITM is a public funded higher education institute, whose vision and mission should abide for the upliftment of the common mass, who are the taxpayers. Rather, the move from DoS, IITM says there is no space for such opinions and discussions. We would also like to know what exactly constitutes the “misuse of privileges” and how the specific issues raised in the complainant’s letter could be deemed controversial? The right of function of any independent student body is not the ‘privilege’ given by the authority, rather it’s the democratic right of student themselves.

We strongly believe that what we stated in our pamphlets and content of our discussion is correct and as per the Constitution. Therefore, action against the Ambedkar-Periyar Study Circle by the DoS, IITM is undemocratic and unilateral against the interest of common mass for whom the Institute itself is indebted; hence we are not accepting this decision taken by the Institute.

Education getting rapidly 'saffronised': Archbishop

by

Archbishop Bernard Moras

Bengaluru: Archbishop Bernard Moras of Bangalore on Thursday expressed his concern over the ‘rapid saffronisation’ of the education system in the country and the slow disappearance of secularism in educational institutions.

Addressing the 17th All India Association for Christian Higher Education conference here on Thursday, the archbishop said India was a multicultural society and the education imparted at Christian institutions was for all. He said the institutions were not only imparting education, but also preparing the future generation to become the leaders of the nation.

He said though it had been more than six decades since the country attained independence, nearly 30 per cent of the population did not have access to basic education. However, he said, South India was fortunate enough to have a large number of educational institutions.

H G Dr Jacob Mar Irenios, Metropolitan of Kochi, Malankara Orthodox Church, urged the leaders of the Church to contribute to improving the quality of education. Rev Dr Prasanna Kumar, secretary and bishop-designate, Diocese of Central Karnataka of the Church of South India, was also present on the occasion.

In Gujarat, all schools asked to perform 'compulsory' Saraswati Puja

by

Representational Image. Courtesy: TakeEarth

Representational Image. Courtesy: TakeEarth

Ahmedabad: The Ahmedabad School Board has whipped up a controversy with its circular asking all schools to hold ‘Saraswati Vandana’ on Vasant Panchami on Saturday, drawing accusations of promoting ruling BJP’s Hindutva agenda and warnings of legal action and protest by Congress.

“Vasant Panchami is the occasion to remember Goddess of knowledge Maa Saraswati Devi. To make students understand the importance of education, schools need to organize Saraswati Puja and make students recite prayers of Saraswati during prayer gathering. Also, make them understand how Vasant Panchami is celebrated in other states,” reads the January 19 circular issued by the board.

Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation’s (AMC) School Board runs around 450 primary schools in the city, including 64 Urdu medium schools, mostly in Muslim dominated areas attended by around 16,000 students from the minority community.

The circular has raised the hackles of opposition Congress, which has dubbed the move as an attack on the fundamental rights of Muslims. All forms of idolatry is prohibited in Islam.

Congress councillor from Sarkhej ward Haji Mirza Baig called it an attempt to promote the BJP’s Hindutva agenda.

“In a democracy, everyone has the right to follow their religion and related rituals. This circular is an attack on the freedom of not only Muslims, but also of other religions. Why (do) they want Muslim students to perform puja? It should not be made compulsory in Urdu schools,” said Baig.

“Congress councillors will stage protest against such dictatorial approach of AMC. Urdu schools, where majority students are Muslims, must be kept away from this order. Otherwise, we will take legal action and knock the doors of the court,” he warned.

Amid the mounting outcry over its circular, the board attempted a damage control with its chairman claiming it was not intended to hurt anybody’s religious sentiments.

“Our sole aim is to promote the quest for knowledge among children and not to hurt the followers of any religion,” Jagdish Bhavsar, chairman of the board, said.

“Everybody prays and worships in his own way. If they are not comfortable with offering prayers to Saraswati, they can do ‘Ibadat’ (worship) in their own way. The only aim of this circular is to make children aware of the importance of education,” he said.

AMC School Board’s administrator L D Desai appeared to defend the move, saying, “Saraswati is the goddess of education and schools are temples of education for students of all religions. Thus, we just want students to understand the importance of education by remembering the goddess through prayer on that day.”

Describing it as an “educational and not religious” programme, Desai said,”There is absolutely no controversy. None of the Urdu medium schools have approached us against this programme.

(PTI)

Promoting Prejudice, Poisoning Minds – Parivar’s intrusions into education

by

Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Oct 2014, claimed that the Mahabharat’s story of Karna, who was "not born of his mother’s womb", was evidence of the fact that “genetic science” was prevalent at the time in India. In this file photo he is seen addressing the inaugural function of 102nd Indian Science Congress in Mumbai.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Oct 2014, claimed that the Mahabharat’s story of Karna, who was “not born of his mother’s womb”, was evidence of the fact that “genetic science” was prevalent at the time in India. In this file photo he is seen addressing the inaugural function of 102nd Indian Science Congress in Mumbai.

by Praful Bidwai

If there’s one thing that the 102nd Indian Science Congress, held in Mumbai, will be remembered for, it’s the outrageous claims made at it about the achievements of science in ancient India, including the assertion that Indians between 7000 and 6000 BC knew how to make airplanes that could undertake “interplanetary travel”, and fly backwards and sideways, as well as forwards!

Similarly, Indians had invented differential calculus, knew about viruses and developed advanced techniques of plastic surgery—well before anyone else. These claims confuse mythology with science, concoct history, and are based on pure fantasies of insecure ultra-nationalists who assert that ancient India’s accomplishments in the arts or sciences put even the modern era to shame.

The claim about airplanes was demolished 40 years ago by Indian Institute of Science-Bangalore aeronautical engineers in scientific journals. Yet, such claims are now made with brazen confidence. This speaks to the power of example, one set by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, no less, when he cited the mythical figures of Ganesha and Karna as proof that Indians knew about genetics, in-vitro fertilisation and complex surgery thousands of years ago!

Such self-glorification and myth-making can only make India the laughing stock of the world, but is an integral part of the Sangh Parivar’s distinct self-identity and obscurantist agenda. Its impact is now becoming visible in the Parivar’s Long March through the Institutions of the State.

Led by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, and enabled by the Bharatiya Janata Party’s government, Parivar activists are reshaping, changing, and subverting institutions, especially in education and culture. Their aim is to influence their working to reflect the Sangh’s specific brand of “cultural nationalism” by promoting Hindutva icons, engineering long-term changes in programmes and priorities, and making key appointments of personnel who will loyally execute such changes.

The imposition of observing Christmas Day as “good governance” day on Central educational institutions—including thousands of schools, 45 Central universities, the elite Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) and Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs)—was only one step in that direction.

The latest move is the award of National Research Professorships to Sangh sympathisers: Kannada novelist SL Bhyrappa, Mumbai-based economics lecturer Ashok Modak and Hindi journalist/writer Suryakant Bali. Such Professorships were held in the past by physicists CV Raman and Satyendranath Bose, musician Ravi Shankar, writer Mahashweta Devi and sociologist Andre Beteille.

Bhyrappa is an accomplished and successful novelist, but he controversially accuses Tipu Sultan of being a religious fanatic! According to former BJP functionary Sudheendra Kulkarni, who doesn’t hide his pro-Sangh bias, Bhyrappa nurtures a “fevered hatred of Indian Muslims”. Modak isn’t a distinguished scholar. And Bali’s claim to academic distinction is unknown, but the launch of his last book was attended by human resource development minister Smriti Irani and RSS joint general secretary Krishna Gopal. Both Bhyrappa and Bali had endorsed Mr Modi as PM-candidate.

The larger Sangh agenda includes substantive changes both in the content of education and appointments in prestigious institutions. Ms Irani has announced that the government will soon formulate a whole new education policy. It has appointed pro-Hindutva or pro-BJP individuals to head the apex-level Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR), the renowned Indian Institute of Advanced Study (IIAS) at Shimla, and Banaras Hindu University (BHU), established in 1916.

This sends out an unmistakable signal about the shape of things to come in other Central universities including Jawaharlal Nehru University, the Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR), some of the IITs and IIMs, and the Central Board of Secondary Education, among other institutions where new appointments to top posts or councils/governing bodies are due soon.

An even stronger signal emanates from the manner in which Parvin Sinclair, the upright and independent-minded director of the National Council for Educational Research and Training (NCERT), was ousted more than two years before her term ended, aborting at the last stage the improvement and updating of the National Curriculum Framework-2005, which she had initiated.

The NCF was itself the product of a long, broad consultative process of “de-saffronisation”, which led to the production of NCERT’s widely acclaimed, secular-liberal, pedagogically vastly superior, school textbooks, adopted by many state textbook boards and schools.

On May 22, even before Mr Modi was sworn in, the RSS-affiliated Shiksha Sanskriti Utthan Nyas run by Dinanath Batra (he, of book-pulping fame) demanded a “total” overhaul of the education system and rewriting of textbooks so they inculcate “patriotism”, reflect “Indian tradition, social consciousness… and spiritualism”, and help build a “strong and vibrant India”.

Mr Batra insisted that Ms Irani reconstitute the NCERT. When Dr Sinclair refused to toe Ms Irani’s line on the NCF and other issues, she was reportedly falsely charged with financial irregularities, not allowed to defend herself fully, and asked to resign.

Another recent Irani casualty is IIT-Delhi director RK Sheogaonkar who resigned in protest against her blatant interference in the institute’s affairs. The faculty has strongly supported Dr Sheogaonkar.

There has been no similar purge in other institutions so far. But the government has used three other methods to favour the Parivar: appointing RSS functionaries or sympathisers to high academic positions although they manifestly lack scholarly competence, leave alone distinction; nominating mediocrities who are BJP fellow-travellers to major institutions; and co-opting appointees of the previous regime by striking questionable deals with them which benefit the Parivar.

The appointment of Girish Chandra Tripathi as BHU vice-chancellor, a post held earlier by luminaries like S Radhakrishnan and Acharya Narendra Dev, falls in the first category. Mr Tripathi, a longstanding hardcore prant (province)-level RSS official, was earlier a professor of economics at Allahabad university. But going by a google-scholar search and other available biographical entries, he has published no books or papers, at least recently.

According to a former colleague of his, Mr Tripathi “probably never taught a full 50-minute class”. But he has shrewdly played Uttar Pradesh-style Brahmin politics as a loyalist and understudy of Giridhar Malaviya, Madan Mohan Malaviya’s manipulative pro-RSS grandson and a former judge.

Mr Malaviya famously nominated Mr Modi as the BJP’s Lok Sabha candidate from Varanasi. He also headed the search-cum-selection committee that recommended Mr Tripathi, his own acolyte, for the VC’s post—a blatant conflict of interest!

The appointment of Y Sudershan Rao, a singularly undistinguished historian close to a spiritual guru (who mediated with the RSS-BJP on his behalf), as ICHR chairman is a similar, if somewhat less sordid, story. Prof Rao rails against Western and Marxist scholars and defends the caste system. He wants to prove the historicity of the Mahabharata and the Ramayana.

Prof Rao emphasises the relevance of the Puranas: “The ICHR has to play a catalyst role in taking to people their history” through the epics. According to distinguished historian Romila Thapar, Prof Rao fails to distinguish between epics and historical texts. He has published no articles on the epics, or on Ayodhya as Rama’s birthplace, in peer-reviewed journals.

One of Prof Rao’s first actions was to invite a Belgium-based, rabidly pro-Hindutva scholar, SN Balagangadhara, to deliver the Maulana Azad Memorial Lecture on November 11 (available at ichr.ac.in). Balagangadhara drew serious criticism from distinguished historians like Rajan Gurukkal.

The nomination by the MHRD of Chandrakala Padia as the chairperson of IIAS-Shimla, and by the foreign ministry of Kavita Sharma as the president of South Asian University, belong to the second category. Dr Padia, who comes from Varanasi, does have some published work, but its quality is not commensurate with her position at IIAS. Ms Sharma was director of the India International Centre, Delhi and earlier principal of Hindu College, but can claim little academic accomplishment.

Third, the Parivar has cut deals with various UPA appointees, who have turned pro-BJP-RSS, including University Grants Commission chairman Ved Prakash and Delhi university VC Dinesh Singh. They both attended a lunch hosted by RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat in Delhi on October 12. Mr Prakash in anxious to continue in his post till 2017 despite vigilance and other inquiries against him.

Dr Singh’s favourite, but mindless, scheme (Four-Year Undergraduate Programme) was recently shot down by Ms Irani. Sensing the wind, he capitulated. He now plays Bhumihar-cum-Parivar politics and recently made more than 20 questionable appointments in university departments, according to teachers. He has also provided a platform to senior RSS functionaries on the campus, including Indresh Kumar and Krishna Gopal.

A dark presence behind some of these appointments and related decisions is said to be MHRD’s officer on special duty Sanjay Kachroo, who has worked with several corporate houses, including Reliance, and had access to secret MHRD files even before he received intelligence clearance.

With such players in key positions, the Parivar is intruding into education—probably with nasty communal consequences. A future article will discuss its interference in the field of culture.

Praful Bidwai is a journalist, social science researcher and activist on issues of human rights, the environment, global justice and peace. He received the Sean MacBride International Peace Prize, 2000 of International Peace Bureau, Geneva and London, one of the world’s oldest peace organisations.

KNOW US

GET INVOLVED

PROMOTE

Archives