ANNOYANCE- II

 Annoyance - II

continues 

A process may be defined as a long, systematic conditioning to yield a mature product.

Short of this, the product will be defective. Defective products cannot be marketed; at best can only be under-sold. As is known, quality determines the acceptability of any item. I learn that some drastic step has been introduced to the students of PG level and above to face a mandatory paper on “communication skills” by the MK University. Apparently the step looks positive. Honestly it is degrading in the sense that shamelessly these candidates were admitted to graduation by the very same university. If the university is honest about it, an even more stringent step is called for. Never allow inadequate performers to pass any examination. It is common knowledge that product quality depends on the quality of components. Quality efforts must begin from the lower end and not at the apex. Any such tuning at the top amounts to bringing cosmetic looks. It would only fade because quality has to be an in-built property. It can not be added to a finished product. We are clearly worried that our product is already “finished” and we like to keep it alive until it is “sold”. With the quantum of recalcitrance witnessed in many youngsters especially for communication, I can only pray the Almighty.” please help them” since teachers cannot do much to it. Another dimension that has complicated matters is the unjust belief that, developing the communication skills is the domain of the language teachers. It is wrong by the very perception. Every form of knowledge is transmitted by communication. As such, teachers at their individual levels should focus to provide the nuances of communication in their branches of knowledge.  A mere working knowledge, for a strategy like teaching is not enough. Use of appropriate terms to convey the idea is communication. It need not be high-sounding or long winding statements. Precision is called for. Class rooms turn dull because expressions are mundane. The teacher uses the same words in a set pattern. If some variety is used to bring changes in words or modulations, student will look up for freshness. Teachers need to exploit the human desire for variety. It is also a mark of zeal on the part of the teacher for lively presentation.. Teachers must avoid believing that students do not understand. The truth is they do not listen to the mundane approach. For any progress exposure is vital. Teachers can bring the exposure opting to use better expressions. Minor difficulty is always an invitation to learn. Students will catch up. Constant familiarity to better usages will work wonders, eliminating the “fear component” in the minds of learners. This is essential to face the real life situations. Many senior teachers also take to base line satisfaction in their approaches.

Over the years this has come about among teachers, largely based on their desire for “popularity” through friendly approaches and relaxations that deprive the learning of its seriousness. Some degree of complexity always introduces seriousness. Without seriousness, the tendency to exert and acquire skills stands ruled out. Please never be sympathetic on matters of evaluation of learning. Our sympathetic accommodation of their inadequacy now will land them in distress. The society needs a different profile altogether. Grooming has to be merciless.     Sympathetic evaluation unfailingly leads to pathetic evolution.

Any stringent approach to teaching and evaluation can mend inadequacies and render long- term justice. If every teacher tightens up, the student community would come to terms to pick up the lead. Teachers need to recognize their social responsibility. Any teacher who fails to correct mistakes is the biggest accident on the society. My suggestion is to carefully plan our teaching schedules to drive our subject matter through better styles of communication, instead of blaming it on the students’ inability to comprehend. Many teachers do not seem to realize the long term inadequacy we are planting into the wards. Teachers must become communicators from the status of “Readers and Dictators” of notes.         

Equally dismal is the profile of many “Doctoral Degree holders”. Some of them are weaker in communication than their students. Shamelessly they would be defended that, “those people have very good knowledge and only thing is they can not express”. If hidden knowledge is enough for a teacher, it would be a greater philanthropy to recruit DUMB SCHOLARS as teachers. Certainly they would not perpetrate improper usages.  Therefore my suggestion is all doctoral title aspirants [with the exception of those on Indian languages] must qualify through a National level communication screening before they can submit the theses. The concept of proportional idiocy has been firmly entrenched by such abysmal performers. It may appear that I launch a tirade. Yes, for a cause dear to me. I do not visualize effective teaching sans communication. Whoever tries to lend excuses on this fundamental requirement is an example of the oxymoron- honest cheat, to say the least. Quite often it is an attempt to defend inadequacy. To convey the value of optimal adequacy over that of abysmal inadequacy, a casual reference to Thermodynamics is useful. [Energy is neither created nor destroyed. It can only be transferred. No energy transfer is 100 % efficient, but it is accompanied by loss in transit.{‘Knowledge’ can be substituted for Energy to clarify the situation}  What is transferred from a donor to a recipient is always less than 100 % as per the law of nature, one can give only less than what [s]he has.

So, an inadequate teacher can give even less than what [s]he has.

 Poverty in teaching does not deserve amnesty. All efforts of social justice would stand defeated if we are not giving the best education to our children. Where is the justice in giving them a bad training? That is why I insist that every teacher has to be absolutely adequate in content, dedicated in approach and inspiring by performance. Though it is a tall order to look for all round brilliance everywhere, certainly any attempt to improve deserves   support and appreciation. Better late than never should be the basic approach towards positive improvement. If every individual takes upon self a vow to improve who can prevent it?

The scenario and what can be done?   Honestly, teaching is a pleasant exercise only if we know how to go about it. People prefer to compare themselves with those whom they personally rate low as teachers. This is not merely a stupidity but a serious impediment to genuine progress in the profession. If we ever desire a personal evaluation, why it should be by a comparison of the kind said above? Either we rate us against established quality performers; or by a dispassionate self evaluation every semester to see how “improvement” is perceptible in every aspect of teaching.  Are we comfortable with every classroom situation in our daily routines? Ask yourself the question –Does autonomy provide me a cover of safety? If brought under the scrutinizing dispensation, would I be of the same comfort? These need not be answered in any forum. Let them be answered with in.  If you honestly feel cool of yourself, probably you are on the right track. If you feel discomfort with in, your introspection must be carried further. Ask self as to why you are uncomfortable? It may be for shirking work or for incomplete attention to classes or for digressing to spend the time instead of utilizing it or for being biased to gender or a mixture of these. I am absolutely confident that every teacher knows for self the stature [s]he carries among colleagues and students. But, my suggesting this introspection is to develop a sense of responsibility by self awareness. It is very difficult for anyone else to run over our ego. Every individual can do it because the individual is conscious of the good and the bad. Despite this, if they do not show signs of improvement, it is largely because of the feeling that “I am not the lone errant”. Would it not be a genuine pride if people say ‘you are the best’ instead of you are one of the bad teachers on our campus?

To Continue                                                  Prof. K. Raman