Strong Castle on a weak Foundation

Higher Educational expansion and Gross Enrollment ratio (GER) seems to be the obsession of our Educational policy planners. The target as per eleventh plan is, establishment of 1500 universities and GER of 15% by 2015. In our quest for quantity, the government allowed the participation the private players. The private sector on the other hand saturated the market with high margin technical courses without out any foresight to its sustainability and long term demand.

Quality became an issue when supply surpassed the demand. Over a period of time the consciousness of a quality degree than an ordinary degree increased, the fittest survived and others perished.  The quality metric is an ever increasing one, the aspirations of the Indian student has reached a global level. The demand for International quality degree still remains high.  

The legendary IITs and NITs are still retain the top slots with regards to quality; with only 30,000 seats on offer, many are moving towards the less competitive American SAT than JEE.

The IITs and other central Institutes and Universities, in spite of their enormous state funding, academic freedom and political non interference, fail miserably when it comes to international ratings. Our best institutions do not appear in the Top-200 list of international Universities. Only three IITs appear in the top 400 list of the international ratings of Times Higher Education, and only IISc Bangalore, appears in top 500 list of Shanghai Jiao Tong University.  

Why our premier institutes don’t figure in the top international ratings? Do we produce only quality technical graduates not quality research at our IITs? Are our IITs a bit overrated? Rather than improving our Universities over the quality metrics set by the rating agencies, the HRD ministry is all set to lobby with the rating agencies out of embarrassment.

Lobbing may be illegal in India; we don’t know whether it a mere consultation or a rank fixing exercises.If rank can be fixed or influenced, why should someone trust these ranks?

On one hand we want our higher educational institutes to be of international standards, we run away from international assessments, which internationally grades peers (15yrs) from different countries in basic skills like reading, maths and science. After our utter poor performance in 2009, India has consistently remained out of Programme for International students Assessment (PISA) conducted by Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). PISA conducts a two our test for fifteen year olds and grades counties based on the students performance, India secured the second last rank in a list of 74 countries in 2009.

The priorities of the Government is misplaced, a knowledge economy can never be created with weak school foundation, mediocre research and nil innovation.   Its hypocrisy, you can never have a strong castle on a weak foundation.   

The Craze for Private Schools

The long midnight queues for procurement for application forms for Kindergarten admission continues unabatedly in various cities of the country. With Parents ever prepared to try all the tricks in the book the demand for Private schools has increased multifold. Recommendations and capitation have become indispensible for Kindergarten admissions. The RTI Act of 2009, which mandates all schools of the country to offer free education to 25% of its sanctioned strength, has played a key role in increase of the demand.

The Private schools are run by Trust Act with Profit as its main motive rather than service or charity. The schools have all the Ingredients of a capitalist institution, underpaid staff with hire and fire service rules, excess tuition fees- than recommended by the regulators, fees for other services offered and overhead fees under various extra and co-curricular heads.  

On the other hand, the State Schools of Tamil Nadu offer free education to all and iced with a host of other benefits. Free books, uniforms, cycle, Laptops and even assured promotion up to eighth standard. The meritorious are selected by the state, staff these schools. The freebies, well trained and experienced staff never attract the attention of the society.

The Indian society recognizes the importance of Education. Even the poorer of the poorest wants to give a quality education his/her ward. The general notion of the society is state education is, meant only for the poor, the state schools can never offer a quality education, Tamil medium instruction hinders English proficiency, and Government teachers never perform. The Government teachers themselves do have similar reservations about these schools; they never admit there wards in these schools.

Quality comes at a price, the state spends crores of rupees on education; in the form of salary, noon meal scheme, training, and other freebies, but still people admit their wards only to these schools out of financial necessity not out of his enthusiasm to offer a quality education to his ward. The politician’s Linguistic chauvinism has kept these still in vernacular mediums, poor Infrastructure, poor instruction delivery, lack of computing facilities, negligible extra or co-curricular activities, large scale dropouts and poor results, dent the image the these schools.

The Government must take some proactive and creative steps to revive these schools. The state Investment in education is huge; it should at least change the medium of instruction in these schools.          

Degradation of Academic Standards in Madras University

Madras University was one of the first Universities established in India in the year I858. The University was modeled on the lines of London University. Once known for its academic excellence, recently it lost its five star status of NAAC. The loss of five star ranks indicates the deterioration academic standards, at Madras University.    

Teaching is unique vocation, quality of instruction delivery depends only the teacher. How can we measure the quality of teaching?  What parameters can exactly measure quality of Instruction delivery? Feedbacks or examination results can never give the right picture. It may be difficult to postulate parameters to evaluate the performance for an Individual, but NAAC does have parameters to evaluate performance for Universities. NAAC Accredits Universities based on many academic parameters like, teaching-learning process, Evaluation, staff-students ratio, quality and quantity of research, achievements in extra and co-curricular activities etc.   

Political Interference in the affairs of the University has proved detrimental to Universities standards. A few good professors put up a good Faculty, a few good Faculties put up a good University. Political appointments of teachers, other higher offices, political affiliations of the faculty members, declining numbers of research publication and bribery at all levels has dragged the University to an abyss.    

A takeover by the center or Academic freedom in all of the Universities affairs can bring the lost glory back to the University.

Political Interference in State Universities

The syndicate of Bharathiar University annulled the appointment of 35 regular academic posts appointed by a recently retired Vice-Chancellor. The cancellations were due to a petition lodged in the Madras High Court alleging irregularities in the selection process.

Bharathiar University is a state University, the Higher Education Minister and Governor of Tamil Nadu State are the Pro-Chancellor and Chancellor respectively.   

The State Government has introduced a new bill in the legislative assembly, “The Annamalai University Act-2013”, on Monday. The Act would enable the state to take over the University donated to it in the year 1929. In the mean time, the Vice-Chancellor is under suspension, the Registrar has resigned from his post and the University is under a special administrator of the Government. The University is closed indefinitely due financial constraints.

The University was donated to the erstwhile Madras State by Sir Annamalai Chettiar. A thankful state created a ceremonial post called Pro-Chancellor for founder, which is still inherited by the founder’s genes.  The colonial privilege enabled the pro-chancellor to select a Vice chancellor of his choice

The State Universities are highly dependent on the state funds and the state ministers in turn consider these Universities as milking cows to enrich their coffers. Staff, Faculty and VC appointments for these Universities are highly commercialized under the table.

 Annamalai University Act 1929, prevented political interference and was under a defacto private hands. However, the nexus between the management and polity continued unabatedly for years. The founders considered the University as their personal property; admissions to courses or appointment to faculties where under their control. The Founders abused their privileges and position and plundered the brand Annamalai with capitation fees and bribes. Ultimately, University collapsed financially and closed down indefinitely.

Across board, the Universities, the staff, the Student community and Higher Education as such are paying a heavy price due to interventions from non Academic Authorities. Vice-Chancellors, who purchase their post with currencies, leave no stones unturned to recover it back with profits during their services. They indulge in unfair and unethical practices detrimental the core function of the University, i.e. Academic excellence.

 Universities should strive to achieve perfection in their Academic pursuits. A liberal funding and non interference from the Central Government created islands of excellence like, IITs, IISc, NIT’s and other Central Universities. Academics should be left the Academicians; Universities should be empowered to select their own Academic heads sans any political influence. The State Universities have a talented pool of scholars; part or at least fifty percent of seats can be legally commercialized or pegged to market value fees for a Global Populace the rest could be subsidized for citizens of the State. Sustenance and quality education should be motto of our Universities, not nepotism and mediocrity. 

The bitter truth of Indian history

In continuation with his previous article, “Boss, read the true history before talking”, Mr. S Gururmurthy, has published his second article; “Past is relevant, even for Economics”, in TNIE, April 13^th edition.

Mr.S.Gurumurthy, argues that, India dominated the world economically for 1800 out of 2000 years. Indian economic history needs to be rewritten by nationalist and our past needs to be recalled again and again for a prosperous future.

The low population of the world, the institutionalized subjugation of the citizenry and culture of society was the rationale explanation offered for the accumulation of wealth by a few aristocrats in ancient lands of our subcontinent, which the westerners collectively called India.

The economic history of India for most part was scripted by the English, though myopic, goes well with modern India as it portrays India as a single entity. The history of Indian prosperity is evidenced from western sources than Indian ones. The History of Indian poverty may not be a documented one, nevertheless no historical proof is needed to prove that a majority of population was kept way from education, women- irrespective of caste/class were often never considered equals, and official language of the state was either exclusive or foreign. No records exits, ether national or western which proves that ancient India was healthy or well nourished.

The divide of Aryan or Dravidian was  the creation of the colonizers, agreed but not the modern but the ancient ones. The etymology of the word Aryan could be traced back to the Manusmrithy. (Mr.S.Gurumurthy himself refers the doyen of Tamil literature, U.V.Swaminathan, as an ‘Aryan’)

Wealth building requires entrepreneurship and Business. Mr.S.Gurumurthy, professional Charted Accountant knows; Partnerships, incorporated companies and entrepreneurship are a contribution of the west. Trade in India was hereditary, the feudal nature always restricted its size, and business was an individual or a caste vocation. India never had a tradition of sustainable wealth creation.

Being imprisoned in colonial history serves our National interests better than rewriting it with sans western records. The western version paints everyone a loser, no specific religion, ethnicity or caste is glorified here.   Sathyameva Jayathe is our national motto; convenient facts cannot be script and bound as volumes of economic history. History needs facts and figures, data which can be peer reviewed and confirmed.

History form eastern sources? Our conquerors and Kings did write their Biographies, mostly  boasting the glory of their own reigns. For most part of history we remained a conquered nation, our history is in a foreign tongue. Our early nationalists have disputed over scripts (Nagari & Urdu) for a widely spoken north Indian Language; a single nationalist version may not exist. Let’s face it; we are a nation of many nations. Our history is a bitter one. Each caste of India has an exclusive history of its own antagonizing other caste, regional History antagonizing others, ethnic History antagonizing others, linguistic History antagonizing others and religious History   antagonizing others.Would the right wings accept a version of history, where all the credit goes to Islam for India’s prosperity?.Such a History would bring more chaos, confusion and hatred among us.

 The past needs to be recalled, again and again for us learn; what caused the Military, Social and Political downfall of this country and unlearn all the ills that still prevails in this country.

The bitter truth of Indian economic history

The new Indian express carried an interesting article on its Saturday edition dated April 6^th 2013. The article was titled “Boss, read the true history before speaking”, and was penned by S Gurumurty, an eminent columnist and commentator on political and economic issues. In his passionate or rather jingoistic analysis of Indian and world economic history, Gurumurthy concludes “Hindu rate of growth had made India super power. Colonialism did India down to poverty. Nehruvian socialism made it stagnate even after freedom”.

Gurumurthy quotes three interesting  figures  that would astonish any Indian ; first, the findings of a Belgian Economist Paul Bairoch, “in 1750 India’s share of world GDP was 24.5 per cent, China’s 33 per cent, but the combined share of Britain and the US was just two per cent”, “in middle 19th century, the West had a lower standard of living than Asians”, “India’s share fell to 20 per cent in 1800; to 18 per cent in 1830; and finally crashed to 1.7 per cent in 1900, while China’s crashed to 6.2 per cent from 33 per cent. In these 150 years, the combined share of Britain and the US rose to from 2 per cent to over 41 per cent” . Second, findings of economic historian, Angus Maddisson, “India was the leading economic power of the world from the 1st year of the first millennium till 1700 - with 32 per cent share of world’s GDP in the first 1000 years and 28 per cent to 24 per cent in the second millennium till 1700”. Third, a study conducted by Jamia Milia Islamia University, “two thousand years ago India was bankrupting Roman Egypt of its gold reserves by its export surplus”, “Indian merchant navy had a fleet strength of 40,000 ships in Akbar’s time and as many as 34,000 ships before the British arrived”, “between 1493 and 1930 India absorbed 14 per cent of world gold production”.

The facts presented are quite informative; the economic history of India seems rosier than the political one. The figures presented may be correct or reasonably unchallengeable, but has some inconsistencies and anomalies. Continuing with Prof.Sen’s, Indian tradition of arguments, some arguments are made here contradicting Gurumurthy. The arguments include various factors like geographical spread, forced labor, population, distribution of wealth and the role of religion in economic development.

India as a nation is the creation of the British; for most part of its history, stretching over a period of two thousand years, India remained a subcontinent of many independent nation states. Indian history has passed through many a phases; each phase had diverse official religions, languages and borders. Accordingly the country could be referred as Bharath, Hindustan, Indica and India. Bharath, the land of the ancients stretched until modern Afghanistan. It could be evidenced from Mahabharata that, Gandhar or modern Kandahar was a Hindu state; the Bamiyan Buddha was a part of Bharath. For until twelfth century South Asia was India. With ever increasing Islamic raids from the North West, most part north India was an annexed to Afghanistan, barring some southern lands Hindustan constituted South Asia and Afghanistan. India, Bangladesh and Pakistan were integral parts of Indica Britannia.

Ancient India was colonized by many foreigners, foreign religion was imposed on her people nevertheless the majority remained Hindus. Hinduism, a word of Arabic roots is neither a religion of the Book (Bible or Quran) nor a religion of the Prophets. Though written records like Vedas, Upanishads, Shastras and Sutras do exist and are considered divine, they play minimum or no role in practice of Hindu religion. The authors of most of these texts are unknown and are considered to be written record of ancient knowledge and society. The official constitution of the Aryans/Hindus, the Manushastra, created a rigid hierarchical society. A vast majority of manual labor was kept in the lower strata of society under the servitude of a small minority, which had the religious rights to amass wealth. The system encouraged labor exploitation and sustained the exponential growth of the wealthy few. The Mughal rulers never challenged the ways and practices of the Hindu agrarian society; rather they imitated the Hindu practices along with slavery. The remnant of this system still prevails in Pakistan. The feudal system of Zamindars resulted in  exploitation of labor in India. Concurrently, Chinese dynasties ruled over their lands with iron fists, Slavery and forced labor. Exploitation of the citizenry was rampant in ancient china. The Chinese wall was built with bones and blood of the enslaved citizenry. Slaves were sacrificed upon the demise of their masters; upon on their deaths, the cruel emperors took all their slaves with them to the next world.   

The wealth generated by cheap labor of Asia was amassed by a few aristocratic feudals ; the wealth generated had no public expenditure. The assets were deployed only for the construction of luxurious palaces, forts of harems and religious institutions. Knowledge was the preserve of the few, no educational institute were established. A Nalanda and Taxila were more or  less Buddhist Sangas . In summary the rich remained rich and the poor remained poor with in rigid lines, a middle class never existed in ancient days.

Another important anomaly in the analysis is the, world population. Until the fourteenth century the known world excluded the Americas and Australia. It’s doubtful whether the aboriginals were ever considered as members of the civilized world. The world population at the time of Christ was 170 million and increased to 750 million by 1750, a 220% increase in 17.5 centuries. On the hand the world population figure of 2012 was 7 billion, a 460% percent increase in 2.5 centuries.

Madison’s Analysis of Asia can never be claimed as an achievement of modern India or China. Maddisson’s India analysis, in strict sense considered whole of South Asia and Afghanistan. Ancient Asia had an Institutionalized system of free or forced labor; exploitation of a large majority by the Aristocratic minority was the order of the day, the region never had a welfare state model of governance. The world had a small population and that magnified Asia’s contribution to the world economy. Bairoch’s research era not only coincides with colonialism and Imperialism, but also with Industrial revolution. Hindustan missed the Industrial age, her 30,000 odd ships never sailed on the high seas, and her vessels never forayed on any adventure nor discovered any new lands. A decrease in India share in world economy during this period could be accredited to her illiteracy and her ignorance of Industrialization. The British reformed the Land Revenue and Governance system. Establishment of three universities was the one of first acts the Raj. These universities produced the native Judges, Lawyers, Civil Servants, Reformers and all our revered Freedom fighters.  Nehru strengthened and nurtured the roots of democracy in India; unlike Pakistan, a security state, Nehru created a welfare state. Democracy coupled with Liberalism saw a decent distribution of wealth among the Indian masses.

Religion may not be a contributing factor in economic development in a Modern Liberal economy, but religion does influence the society and economic development depends on society. Religion imposes many a mundane rules which most often conflicts business or entrepreneurial interest. However credit for economic success or censure for its failure can be attributed to religion only in a mono-religious society not in multi-religious secular society like India. A Hindu rate of growth is a sham one; a notional figure to which no pride or humility should be attributed to.