Opinion

The RSS has a proposal to award PhDs to people who haven't gone to university

The plan, sent to the HRD minister, is possibly aimed at securing academic respectability to its small pool of ideologues and dilettantes.

The Shiksha Sanskriti Utthan Nyas, an organisation tasked with pushing the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s education agenda, has given Human Resource Development minister Prakash Javadekar a five-page critique of the draft New Education Policy, which was made public in June.

“It is not clear how the New Education Policy differs from the old education policy,” the critique states, adding that it lacks an “integrated…vision, mission, lakshya [goal] and udeshya [message]”.

This assertion is not borne out by a comparison of the six points that the RSS-affiliated outfit sets out as “goals of education” and the “broad objectives" of the New Education Policy, 2016. Where the draft policy and the Shiksha Sanskriti Utthan Nyas document differ is that the latter makes no mention of India’s diversity, while talking of social-coexistence.

Apart from calling for a total rejection of the National Curriculum Framework, 2005, the critique is short on specifics and replete with commonplace statements such as “importance of teachers to quality of education cannot be denied”.

The Shiksha Sanskriti Utthan Nyas has also given Javadekar an annotated copy of Suggestions for a New Education Policy in which it acknowledges that the draft National Education Policy contains many good things. Several of the outfit’s proposals such as a special curriculum for tribal areas, the mother tongue as medium of instruction in primary schools and a promotions policy for career advancement of teachers have been included in the draft policy document. However, the outfit clearly hopes that its political connection and easy access to the Human Resources Development minister will allow it to redirect the revision of the draft policy to include some of its proposals that the draft policy ignored.

Familiar RSS demands

Some of these proposals are what we have come to expect from the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s education organisations. Among them is a proposal to control the content of textbooks and published research. The RSS, in setting up the Shiksha Sanskriti Utthan Nyas, committed senior people and resources towards excising what it deems to be “insulting” references to Indian culture, tradition, sects, eminent personalities, and the “incorrect interpretations” of facts. The Nyas has successfully used public campaigns – supported by the Sangh’s street-fighting arms – and the courts to have textbooks altered and books banned.

Its other major concern is with making Indian languages the medium of instruction. The RSS has long held that education in an Indian language, ideally Hindi, is the only way to raise a population that is imbued with what it calls Bharatiya culture. It has, over the years, come to accept that Hindi is unacceptable as the medium of instruction in non-Hindi speaking states and hence proposes that the medium of school education until class five be in the mother tongue or regional language. This part of the proposal fits with what education experts and cognitive scientists say is the importance of the mother tongue in how young children learn, and is part of the draft National Education Policy.

Beyond class five, the Nyas does not specify the medium of instruction, but it says that English, and any foreign language, should not be mandatory at any level in the education system, and all English-medium tertiary education institutes like the Indian Institutes of Technology and Indian Institutes of Management should immediately provide for teaching in all Indian languages.

In its critique of the draft National Education Policy submitted to Javadekar, it states: “The draft NEP reflects the ‘angrezi mentality’ of its authors, because it recommends making English as second language mandatory.”

Angrezi refers to the English language, but in common parlance it is also used to mean foreign.

Sangh’s education model

The nine-page Suggestions for a New Education Policy is a mostly inchoate list that reveals much about the Sangh Parivar’s understanding of, and attitude to, formal education, and its cultural and intellectual anxieties.

In the sub-section titled "Syllabus and Curriculum" (words it uses interchangeably), it calls for the inclusion of “Indian culture, history and scientific tradition in the basic curriculum at all levels” and the “mandatory inclusion of ‘India’s contribution to the world’, like Vedic mathematics etc”.

Apart from cleansing textbooks of references it believes are insulting, it also wants the New Education Policy to provide for a “review [of] how India is presented in education curricula abroad, and future steps based on this”. This hints at taking its book-cleansing efforts to foreign shores, where its supporters are already providing yeoman service, with no great success.

In the sub-section on research, the RSS document makes some remarkable propositions. For example, it wants a “provision to be made for results of research to be published in local/domestic journals and for these to then be sent abroad”.

But what stands out is this one sentence: “Research work should be independent, without time constraints and those doing useful research outside universities should also be awarded degrees."

Researchers in universities across the country will welcome the first part of the proposal, that research be independent, and there will be not a few who are pleased by the proposal that it should not be constrained by time. But many will ask what the Nyas means by independent, since it gives itself the right to decide what is a correct interpretation and what is acceptable in research, and will use every avenue open to it to ensure that those who disagree with it are censored.

The second part of the Nyas' proposition that those doing “useful research outside universities should also be awarded degrees” sounds like a plan to put ideological pamphleteers and dilettantish writers on par with scholars who have worked hard at university and received a degree for research that meets certain quality standards and passes scholarly review.

Some universities abroad have a rarely used provision to consider original published work instead of a standard thesis for a doctorate. The published work has to meet the high standards of research in these universities, which are truly independent of political control. In India, where governments in general, and the Bharatiya Janata Party government in particular, control universities by appointing Vice Chancellors and administrators for their pusillanimity and political affiliation, this is a slippery slope.

Fashioning academic respectability

This arrangement will give Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s ideologues the imprimatur of academic respectability and the certification they need to apply for university jobs and public positions they are now not qualified for. The Sangh Parivar’s small pool of ideologues and dilettantes meet the demands of Indian news television and social network discussions, but not much else. Their inability to breach the relatively low walls of Indian academia stand in the way of its project to command the production of knowledge. If they can just be given degrees, circumventing the rigours of university-based research, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh will have fixed its little problem.

RSS-birthed organisations like the Shiksha Sanskriti Utthan Nyas have unprecedented access to ministers in the BJP-led government. The extent to which the Sangh’s wish list is reflected in government policy depends on how politically acceptable the proposals can be made. It will be interesting to see which, if any, of the proposals of the Shiksha Sanskriti Utthan Nyas that did not make it to the draft National Education Policy, go into the final policy document. Much will depend on public scrutiny of these proposals.

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content  BY 

As India turns 70, London School of Economics asks some provocative questions

Is India ready to become a global superpower?

Meaningful changes have always been driven by the right, but inconvenient questions. As India completes 70 years of its sovereign journey, we could do two things – celebrate, pay our token tributes and move on, or take the time to reflect and assess if our course needs correction. The ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, the annual flagship summit of the LSE (London School of Economics) South Asia Centre, is posing some fundamental but complex questions that define our future direction as a nation. Through an honest debate – built on new research, applied knowledge and ground realities – with an eclectic mix of thought leaders and industry stalwarts, this summit hopes to create a thought-provoking discourse.

From how relevant (or irrelevant) is our constitutional framework, to how we can beat the global one-upmanship games, from how sincere are business houses in their social responsibility endeavours to why water is so crucial to our very existence as a strong nation, these are some crucial questions that the event will throw up and face head-on, even as it commemorates the 70th anniversary of India’s independence.

Is it time to re-look at constitution and citizenship in India?

The Constitution of India is fundamental to the country’s identity as a democratic power. But notwithstanding its historical authority, is it perhaps time to examine its relevance? The Constitution was drafted at a time when independent India was still a young entity. So granting overwhelming powers to the government may have helped during the early years. But in the current times, they may prove to be more discriminatory than egalitarian. Our constitution borrowed laws from other countries and continues to retain them, while the origin countries have updated them since then. So, do we need a complete overhaul of the constitution? An expert panel led by Dr Mukulika Banerjee of LSE, including political and economic commentator S Gurumurthy, Madhav Khosla of Columbia University, Niraja Gopal Jayal of JNU, Chintan Chandrachud the author of the book Balanced Constitutionalism and sociologist, legal researcher and Director of Council for Social Development Kalpana Kannabiran will seek answers to this.

Is CSR simply forced philanthropy?

While India pioneered the mandatory minimum CSR spend, has it succeeded in driving impact? Corporate social responsibility has many dynamics at play. Are CSR initiatives mere tokenism for compliance? Despite government guidelines and directives, are CSR activities well-thought out initiatives, which are monitored and measured for impact? The CSR stipulations have also spawned the proliferation of ambiguous NGOs. The session, ‘Does forced philanthropy work – CSR in India?” will raise these questions of intent, ethics and integrity. It will be moderated by Professor Harry Barkema and have industry veterans such as Mukund Rajan (Chairman, Tata Council for Community Initiatives), Onkar S Kanwar (Chairman and CEO, Apollo Tyres), Anu Aga (former Chairman, Thermax) and Rahul Bajaj (Chairman, Bajaj Group) on the panel.

Can India punch above its weight to be considered on par with other super-powers?

At 70, can India mobilize its strengths and galvanize into the role of a serious power player on the global stage? The question is related to the whole new perception of India as a dominant power in South Asia rather than as a Third World country, enabled by our foreign policies, defense strategies and a buoyant economy. The country’s status abroad is key in its emergence as a heavyweight but the foreign service officers’ cadre no longer draws top talent. Is India equipped right for its aspirations? The ‘India Abroad: From Third World to Regional Power’ panel will explore India’s foreign policy with Ashley Tellis, Meera Shankar (Former Foreign Secretary), Kanwal Sibal (Former Foreign Secretary), Jayant Prasad and Rakesh Sood.

Are we under-estimating how critical water is in India’s race ahead?

At no other time has water as a natural resource assumed such a big significance. Studies estimate that by 2025 the country will become ‘water–stressed’. While water has been the bone of contention between states and controlling access to water, a source for political power, has water security received the due attention in economic policies and development plans? Relevant to the central issue of water security is also the issue of ‘virtual water’. Virtual water corresponds to the water content (used) in goods and services, bulk of which is in food grains. Through food grain exports, India is a large virtual net exporter of water. In 2014-15, just through export of rice, India exported 10 trillion litres of virtual water. With India’s water security looking grim, are we making the right economic choices? Acclaimed author and academic from the Institute of Economic Growth, Delhi, Amita Bavisar will moderate the session ‘Does India need virtual water?’

Delve into this rich confluence of ideas and more at the ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, presented by Apollo Tyres in association with the British Council and organized by Teamworks Arts during March 29-31, 2017 at the India Habitat Centre, New Delhi. To catch ‘India @ 70’ live online, register here.

At the venue, you could also visit the Partition Museum. Dedicated to the memory of one of the most conflict-ridden chapters in our country’s history, the museum will exhibit a unique archive of rare photographs, letters, press reports and audio recordings from The Partition Museum, Amritsar.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Teamwork Arts and not by the Scroll editorial team.