Books; People; Ideas : These are few of my favourite things. As I live between day-to-day compromises and change-the-world aspirations, this is the chronicle of my journey, full of moments of occasional despair and opportune discoveries, of connections and creations, and, most of all, my quest of knowledge as conversations.
Subscribe to this blog
Follow by Email
A 'Liberal Education' for India
In an ironic twist, many large employers in India complain that the education Indian graduates receive are too narrow.
Surely, the same employers, riding high on growth of IT services, helped model a tertiary education system - second largest in the world in terms of student numbers - as one narrowly, vocationally, defined. The glamour of the IT services industry, with an urban cosmopolitan life and the chance of lottery-draw for offshore opportunities, completely transformed Indian middle class life over the last two decades: That the whole ecosystem of Middle Class education, from Senior School to Business School, aligned itself to these new opportunities, is no surprise at all.
But this expansion has now stalled, offshore is becoming off limits, and the industry is transforming rapidly. Rather than each corporation trying to develop their various enterprise-wide systems from scratch, and thereby, handing out huge multi-year development contracts to be executed by an army of low-cost coders, more and more companies are now using Products and Apps, prepackaged solutions that can be adapted with some customisation. While the IT services businesses keep maintaining the systems they have built in the last few decades, they can see that business is coming to an end. They are now competing on a different plain, that requires creative imagination of the future of the business, understanding of real work practises and design thinking. A narrow process-oriented education doesn't necessarily prepare a workforce to think creatively, communicate across cultures and operate with imagination, and therefore, the same employers are complaining about the attributes of the education system they themselves helped to create.
While the impact of the structural change of work is reaching crisis proportions - only a fraction of India's army of Engineers find a job after graduation - there is hardly any substantial conversation about the structure and purpose of Higher Education system in India. The lack of jobs have been picked up by the media, which chose to amplify the point of view of the business community, and solemnly proclaimed that Indian graduates are not employable because the curriculum is out of touch and the pedagogy is too theoretical. The regulator of Technical Education in India, the AICTE, has mandated that anyone doing an Engineering degree must henceforth do a certain number of internships, gaining practical experience. The questions of practicability aside - this would need more than 2 million internship opportunities created every year - this would indeed discriminate against those who can't afford to live out of town at their own expense. However, even if this could be done and done equitably, there is no evidence that this would solve the problem of being able to do a different kind of work than what's being done in the Indian workplaces today.
There is another response to the 'crisis', and this is coming primarily from the Higher Education community. They can see that the close integration that they aspired to achieve through the years isn't working any more, and they can see, from their vantage point, that overt vocationalisation, rather than the lack of it, may actually be the problem. This view is somewhat marginal, and indeed, there are divergent opinions on what needs to be done, but a more humanistic approach to Education is definitely on the table as an option. Some employers, particularly outside the IT Services sector, are increasingly open to graduates who had studied Science, Mathematics or Humanities. Also, the current cultural resurgence in India, the rise of Hindu Nationalism (as well as of the other cultural identities, not just religious but regional as well), has made a cultural education more attractive to Indian middle classes.
Such divergent reactions are typical in India - it is commonly said that everything and its opposite are usually true for India - but the very feeble conversations about a 'Liberal Education' is an important departure. Unlike the universities in Western countries, and even those of China and Japan, modern Indian universities were conceived to be vocationally oriented entities. With exception of some universities set up during the National Education movement in the early twentieth century, and that of Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi in Independent India, a cultural education was never really the agenda in modern Indian Higher Education. This contemporary departure, at least up to this point, has not drawn anything from the earlier ideas, but a rather different 'vocationalisation' imperative. While a 'vocationally oriented Liberal Education' is an oxymoron, but that is exactly the conversation in India. And, because of this, no model exists - no model could exist - for an 'Indian Liberal Education'.
Indeed, the American, British and the European models have evolved over a long period of time, and have had their false starts and crossroads. In a sense, India is just getting started, and early efforts have been rather a hodgepodge of imports of different models. These models are implemented without the context of realities of India. Every great American college, even when they were drawing ideas from German or Scottish models, were a product of their time and place, but the Liberal Arts schools in India, who chose to copy their format, have structured themselves on the opposite proposition, positioning themselves as prep schools for an overseas education rather than a way to engage in the country itself.
Now, this may undermine my earlier claim that there is a conversation about Liberal Education: Apparently what's there is too limited, too little and too superficial. However, that could be said about the whole Indian Higher Education system, which has to find a purpose for itself when the global division of labour model, under which it was conceived and under which it operated for such a long time, falls apart. And, there is indeed a practical model to follow: China, which has developed its liberal education, following their own path and looking to meet their own requirement. When such a moment comes, Indian Educators may find their inspirations, and models, not from American Colleges, but from the Indian ones, such as Viswabharati, BHU and Annamalai.
A friend has recently forwarded me a quote from Lord Macaulay's speech in the British Parliament on 2nd February 1835. I reproduce the quote below: "I have traveled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their native self-culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation."
The email requested me to forward me to every indian I know. I was tempted, but there were two oddities about this quote. First, the language, which appeared …
Business gift giving has always been common and contentious at the same time. Business gifts are usually seen as an ‘advertising, sales promotion and marketing communication medium’ (Cooper etal, 1991). Arunthanesetal (1994) points out that such gifting is practised usually for three reasons: (a) in appreciation for past client relationships, placing a new order, referrals to other clients, etc.; (b) in the hopes of creating a positive, first impression which might help to establish an initial business relationship; and (c) giving may be perceived as a quid Pro quo (i.e. returning a favour or expecting a favour in return for something).
The practitioners of gift-giving generally argue that doing business is often an aggregation of personal interactions and relationships, and gift-giving should be seen as a natural way of maintaining and enhancing these relationships. ‘Business gifts, especially one given in the course of the festive season, is …
In most societies today, making profits are accepted as moral, if not especially praiseworthy. This was not as obvious as it appears today – people used to be embarrassed about making a profit not so long ago.
Crazy as it seems today, it is worth thinking why it was so.
Profits, as economists will put it, is the reward for risk-taking, for putting a business enterprise together in the pursuit of an objective. In this definition, remember, profits are not what it is commonly understood to be – the gross middle-line towards the bottom – but a figure net of entrepreneur’s earning [wages for his labour], dividends and interests on borrowed capital, and provisions for building and other physical assets [a sort of rent, offsetting what these assets could have earned if leased out]. This pure profit – surplus – accrues to a business as a reward to its organisation, for the act of entrepreneurship itself.
Economists were divided on how this surplus comes about. The conventional wisdom was, as I …
Since October, as I walked out of my job, I have been looking to fine-tune my ideas about Education-to-Employment transition.
The first step of this was to look at the experiences of last six years, which I spent developing, first, an online competency-based education programme and then on building employer-engaged online project-based education. These were all good ideas, and the reason that I am not doing these any more are partially operational: The first business was underfunded, and the second one was poorly conceived and implemented. But those are discussions for a different day. I am focusing currently on understanding the key conceptual elements - what works and what doesn't work - of a successful education-to-employment transition.
Indeed, the claim that we can make a student employable with a few months of training is apparently pretentious. The years of schooling, family background and the students' dispensation, and luck, plays a much bigger role than any traini…
Business Schools are a great success story in Higher Education. What may have started as a Correspondence training was transformed by the establishment of University department in Pennsylvania with Joseph Wharton's money, to train the captains of American industry, in 1881. A generation later, with the founding of Harvard Business School in 1908, the whole global phenomenon has got started, though it took until 1954 for Cambridge University to start Management studies (which became a separate business school in 1995, while Oxford started its Business School in 1996). By the turn of the millennium, Business has become the most popular undergraduate subject, and increasingly Engineers and other technically trained professionals were coming to Business Schools to get credentialed. By this time, Business Schools became the most successful sector in Higher Education, with unparallelled prestige, and had developed an entire ecosystem of ranking, funding and accreditation of their own. …
In an earlier post, I pointed out that the application of 'platform thinking' in education misses the mark, as it fails to understand how value is created in education. Since this apparently contradicts my earlier enthusiasm for the university as a 'user network', this statement needs further explanation.
To start with, Clayton Christiansen's idea that the universities of the Twentieth Century needs to evolve from its current 'value chain' model - wherein its value lies in its processes - to a form of User Network, where its value emanates from its community, still resonates with me. The Value Chain model, with departments, examinations, textbooks and degrees, that we know the university for, is very much a late Nineteenth/ early Twentieth century formulation. And, indeed, one can claim that the universities were always communities, and its value came from being a member of that community rather than its end product - the degrees - for much of history. It …
For those who want to change the world through Powerpoint, there are some fundamental beliefs about Education.
Like, education is about 'human capital', making the individuals receiving education economically productive.
And, that, education is important for national competitiveness, the better educated its people are, the more competitive a nation will be.
That education is really about skills - being able to do things - rather than learning: Knowledge can be acquired on-demand and at leisure.
That educators should build close connections with employers and look to align themselves with their future talent needs.
These are ideas everyone - at least everyone who count - agree on. And, such agreement means that all the attention, along with all the money, gets diverted to certain specific things. And, with money and attention, a certain kind of education - a specific idea of education - becomes pre-eminent. It crowds out other ideas, drives out all the alternatives.
Ten years ago, I wrote a post on this blog about Lord Macaulay, or, more specifically, about a statement which he allegedly had made about India. I meant to debunk one of those Internet memes that seek to revise the history with a specific agenda: Now we call these things 'fake news'. Sent to me by a well-meaning and unsuspecting friend, it was a crude hoax, giving itself away in modern language and openly conspiratorial motive, apparently at odds with Reform Era English Intellectual manners and ideas. It took me a few minutes on Google to figure out that the quote came not from Macaulay, but a Hinduvta journal published in the United States in the 70s, which invented the statement.
At that time, almost exactly 10 years ago, this blog was a hobby, my scrapbook of ideas, something I did with no other purpose than keeping the habit of writing. The post about Macaulay changed all that. Little did I suspect how popular and widespread the usage of that quote was, and how many peo…
I wrote about the origin story of the Indian Education system (See An 'Indian' Education) to argue that 'Indianness' of Education does not necessarily have to be regressive, ritualistic or religious. The current tendency of relegating any discussion about an Indian Education to obscurantism cedes the space to Hindu Fundamentalists, who are left free to promote their particular, limited and historically inaccurate ideas. However, a culturally congruent education is much needed at a time when Indian society is at a crossroad, the pains of globalisation is hurting and the crisis of identity is real and urgent.
This post is a rejoinder to the earlier one. Here, I intend to expand my argument that the Indian system of education did not break out from its earlier, imperial, mode. This is a familiar argument that the cultural nationalists make all the time, but, since I didn't think that British imperial education was necessarily English-only (rather, it promoted the mod…