QUO VADIS? --II

 QUO VADIS? --II

Progressing into Error:

There is a general euphoria of English Medium education even for the lowest stages.

From here, people progress into greater complications, without addressing the most fundamental issues. They do not monitor the grasp of the child in terms of languages, numeric skills and ease of learning or the difficulties there of. The “stay cool” attitude of these people is beyond the senses of comprehension. What helps this calm disposition is the mere thought that the child is receiving the best form of education. The early stages being formative, need the richest attention and moral support besides equipping with right books and essential back-up by Dictionary and Atlas as tools. But, an inferior practice of collecting ‘notes’ for preparations is seen even at those lower levels of learning. It is the simplest way of ruining the skills of learning. Right from early stages, using the text as the only authentic reference needs being cultivated. This will prove to be a vital advantage for all higher levels including those of research. But in our attitude, research has no respect [perhaps as it involves originality of analysis] and one has to be only an Engineer or a Doctor and none else. What is erroneous about this?

Professional education has to be approached with the highest sanctity to the respective profession. What I suggest is, the most vital requirement is aptitude on the part of a student to be a professional. But too often there is a parental desire than any aptitude from the incumbent. The biggest malady going on is the ill-equipped population flocking into the portals of professional education on the strength of non-academic criteria. I am not to be misconstrued as voicing against the scope of professional education for all. Certainly I do not find the going any honourable in the sense that attitude is dominating over the aptitude. It is bound to have far reaching implications to the society in the long run. Yet another mass hysteria is to flock into computer studies or any other item in the name of Information technology. I choose to call it hysteria, as, in the eagerness to enter the arena people do not even try to assess institutions for infrastructure, facilities, equipment by way of men and material. Institutions [thatched sheds] capitalize the euphoria and make a fortune even without providing the essential basic training expected for such titles. Our people shamelessly carry those titles in pursuit of higher studies or employment.

Social stupidity has reached a crescendo from which sensible analysis looks far from remote. Another of those market slogans is a graduation in Biotechnology. Any honest effort in Biotechnology must have the richest faculty. What I mean is the teachers of the programme need to be vibrant scientists and the laboratories catering to these requirements must be of  international quality in every aspect like the laboratory ware, sophisticated Enzyme kits,  Assay tools of high-tech instrumentation and exceptionally sharp brains that can perceive every signal from even minor experiments. Do all those institutions claiming to offer the programme satisfy any pair of the suggested requirements? To make my arguments clear let me clarify. At the national level for Post-Graduation in Biotechnology, only some 4 universities have been chosen and students are allotted by selection from a common entrance test. These centres are well taken care of considering the fineness of requirements.  Not being aware of any of these parameters, our students [and their parents] from 12^th standard rush into join the first available thatched shed. Ironically, the very same parents were choosy about the school for nursery level education. We toil so much for sub-primary education, but do not bestow any attention to critical requirements in our tertiary level education. Are we not a funny generation with misplaced priorities and adept in jumping into the bandwagon?

Compounding the error:    To thrust any form of education on anyone, is worse than a compulsory marriage between unwilling partners. This is precisely the evil in practice in large sections of the society. There is a nightmarish approach to higher secondary stages of education, striving every nerve to score the highest marks. It is not a bad idea, provided the student gets equipped.  Where is the equipment in rote learning? Rote learning is the biggest destroyer of understanding, analysis and therefore comprehension. How can any one without comprehension be a professional? Honestly, every avocation needs a thorough comprehension if one desires being functionally relevant. We are in a frame of mind to hold degrees without holding our head high in esteem. That is why all our Graduates and Post-Graduates fail to make the grade in any sphere. People have invited permanent shame upon themselves by rote learning from ill-planned notes. Undigested food can only be vomited and it can not promote health. Same is the plight in education too. Digesting and assimilating the input alone can render health.

We are merely interested in vomiting at the appointed place and hour. But we faithfully lament at our not being able to get a job. We have lost sight of employability. Nobody wants someone who can not convince anyone of anything. The malady is from rote learning.    But, we are biologically well-grown up to the neck. Alert brain can not be implanted after  the stages of education.

Our priority in life has always been English medium, Engineering or Medicine despite our mediocrity. The catastrophe is we only know the goal but not the right way to reach it. We believe in wrong methodologies because we know nothing from first hand familiarity and we are confident of succeeding by mere hear-say approaches. Succeeding does not mean getting the desired degree. How ably one functions in the job alone will determine “success” in the social context. With every client waiting for advice we can not refer to the “notes” to spell a solution. What you have “learnt” alone will help. Possessing a degree does not mean much in life situations. We are only keen of such glossy “Pre-Life” situations.

Our approaches suggest our keenness in acquiring a degree sans the skills or proficiency logically expected from the possession. We show the least inclination in getting well- equipped. Honestly, we do not learn though we aspire for possessing degrees.

To continue                               Prof. K. Raman