The Accidental Educationist And The Book "Education of An Ambassador"

Having been a teacher in the higher education area for more than 20 years, initially as guest faculty and later in a full-time capacity, I have been exposed to the realities, concerns and challenges of the higher education, not only in Kerala but across India. One limiting factor is that barring a few years as a guest faculty at a university in Kerala, my experience was mostly with self-financing institutions in the area of management education and not within the university system. As somebody connected to academic world, I have been hearing lot of ‘educational experts’ lamenting on the reality that barring a rare IIT, no universities or institutions are getting a position in the list of top  250 universities in the world. It might kindly be noted that China(including Hong Kong), with which country we always try to make comparisons(surprisingly barring education), has 11 universities in the top 200 universities. Why India, which once boasted of educational institutions like Nalanda and Takshshila, don’t have even one in the top 200? Academic experts and those in power from time to time have been debating on this  for quite some time but we have not been able to break the jinx.

I have been planning to write a paper on higher education in India with particular reference to management education, that being my area of teaching. The ideation stage was almost over, when I happened to read about a book on higher education written by a retired diplomat, Shri T.P.Sreenivasan,  formerly India’s ambassador to the US. His interest in higher education seems to have been kindled by the offer  by the Government of Kerala to be the Vice-Chairman(the de-facto CEO )of the Kerala State Higher Education Council in 2011, a position which he held till 2016.

I began reading the book with a lot of expectations that I will be able to get some different and new perspective on higher education which could be of help to make my paper on education more meaningful and valuable. But alas! I honestly feel that I was thoroughly disappointed by the contents of the book. The book is used more to promote his aggrandizement(he has chosen to proclaim as “ the champion of change and the most visible spokesperson in the Government on higher education”) rather than identify and offer solutions for the problems, challenges and concerns facing the higher education in general in India and Kerala in particular.

After reading the book, I felt like the following:

Ø  Some of the things should have been avoided or reserved for his autobiography, if he ever planned to write one.

ØMr.Sreenivasan bats for increased autonomy for private institutions in the higher education sector.  Is autonomy the panacea for the many ills that affect higher education?

Ø  The suggestion to  establish a number of Academic Cities is another gimmick to industrialize or corporatize education and thereby please the 'edupreneures' of Kerala .

Ø  Many of the proposals may not result in any improvement in the higher education scenario as these changes are superficail; the changes have to be more at the grass-root level.

Ø  Are our institutions capable of producing scientists or technologists today (with large amounts of resources being made available and having access to the latest in science and technology) like Dr.C V Raman or Dr.ECG Sudarshan, who won laurels and world acclaim despite the rather poor facilities existed in our country and acute paucity of resources that faced them? Why is it so?

Ø  The book is a compendium of reports prepared by the Council and submitted the government. And many of the points in those reports are same.There is no real discussion on the real problems being faced by the higher education sector in the state.

Ø  Some of the articles don’t even provide details like date written or sources from where they have been taken.

Ø  He makes sweeping statements that “..the quality of education provided by the state institutions has been rather poor.”.Where is the evidence? Such statements without any supporting evidence have only helped to lead to a loss of credibility.

Ø  Mr.Sreenivasan seems to have been overwhelmed by the lure of foreign universities and suggests emulation of best practices in foreign education. Why don’t we believe in ourselves and create something new rather than copy from abroad?

Ø  Some of the recommendations like creation of a separate cadre for the best teachers as the most desirable incentive seems to contradict the current approach to the people factor in organizations. World over, institutions and organizations are trying to create classless communities even while finding ways to reward the best performers, here he is recommending that an elite class be created.

Ø  He states that ‘Reading, research and writing are as essential for diplomats as for academics.” Why single out diplomats? These are essential things for anybody in any profession if they want to make a mark in their profession.

Ø  He has used the book to criticize the laid-up attitude of the government rather than discuss problems of higher education at the grass-root level.

Ø  He has also shown his support for the idea about alumni supporting their Alma Mater. This is again based on the western thinking. In the west, many of the  alumni in financially rewarding positions offer their support to the institutions from where they graduated. While Industry-Institution partnership is desirable and may be even essential, it need not always be in terms of money.In a country like India,employment opportunities  are rather scarce, alumni can do more favour by making it a point to visit their Alma Mater for their manpower requirement.

Ø  Annexure 4(India IT Summit, Thiruvananthapuram) is a very good piece in the book but has not much relevance to the theme, higher education.

Ø  Mr.Sreenivasan also discusses about faculty productivity without giving any idea about what the term means and how one can measure it.

Ø  It has not provided any worthwhile input to my thinking on higher education and also to the proposed paper.

Ø  Last, but not the least, the comment on the flap that Mr.TPS has joined the galaxy of men like Sardar K.M.Panikkar,M.C.Chagla etc  is a little outlandish!

Are there things beyond reasoning, laws and constitution?

In India, in many of the matters connected to temples and other places of worship, we usually follow some customs or conventions or traditions rather than resort to laws or provisions in the constitution. The constitution also permits  private bodies  and institutions to frame their own by-laws(like Articles of Association for companies or incorporation laws for any other forms) within  the constitutional provisions. While these may be applicable to most of the materialistic as well as spiritual or religious organizations, not every one used to be treated alike. In the case of spiritual or religious institutions or organizations like temples or churches or mosques, we normally tend to follow certain conventions or conventions, in effect, become the rules. One may not muster enough knowledge on why we follow some conventions, however deep we dig, because there may not be any scripture available on this.

Let’s take for example, temples. Many of the questions which the temples have to face are even these days resolved by Devaprasna, a process by which experts in the field sit together conduct the prasna process and then decide. Few, if any, question this primarily because many of us don’t know why we follow certain traditions. When we don’t know or we can’t know, isn’t it better to simply follow traditions and conventions?(First Break All The Rules could be apt in the  management of organizations but not necessarily everywhere.)

A typical issue is in front of Supreme Court now: entry of women in Sabarimala temple. Feminist organizations and their supporters argue that barring women from entering the temple is pure sexual discrimination and hence against constitutional provisions. The ruling government has also supported this stand(after some changes in its stance). But it might please be remembered that the Government had  decided to go by the Devaprasnas earlier in many of the Sabarimala matters.

Is it necessarily an issue to be decided by court? I don’t know. What I know is that there are more serious issues in India- a large number of them in front of the court and a large number not necessarily in front of them because nobody has brought them up- which need to be addressed than an issue like entry of women at Sabarimala. A verdict favouring women entry  might enthrall the anti-discrimination group but might create heart burns for many who believe in traditions.