The surprising popularity of Liberal Education
Just as Liberal Arts colleges are closing in the United States, in Asia, Liberal Education is the new hot thing.
Most surprisingly, in India, a country where university education was created as a gateway to government jobs and where students, especially male students, pursue formal education for the sole purpose of employment, Liberal Education is suddenly very popular. Private universities, whose fortunes are closely tied to their students' earning potential, are surprisingly keen on liberal education, as they seek to follow the example set up by Ashoka (and a few others), an US-style High-End liberal arts college set up at great expense by a group of Indian entrepreneurs.
One could say that this is not surprising and India is following a path China has followed for some time. Or, for that, even Japan. It may be a common trend that (as in Japan), Engineering and other disciplines draw most high calibre students in a poor country with limited opportunity, but as the economy matures, capabilities grow and consumers demand more, liberal and aesthetic education become more popular with the students.
But, India is not rich - at least not yet - and its economy is neither mature nor have vaulted up the global value chain. Its middle class still earns very little - its GDP per capita is one-fifth of that of China - and the labour market value proposition of a liberal and aesthetic education is still unclear. And, besides, India, after China's example, value economic prosperity over democratic capability building, and more engineers, rather than liberal arts graduates, it should need.
So, the surprising popularity of Liberal Education needs to be traced back to a few peculiar Indian predicaments.
First, the country is somewhat stuck in the global value chain: It is trapped in a middle-income trap without being a middle-income country! Its strange development trajectory, of fast prosperity of an English speaking, technically qualified urban middle class, has created a two-speed country: 'Islands of Silicon Valley type prosperity in the middle of vast landscapes of sub-Saharan poverty'. It is this middle class, which is desperate to differentiate themselves and if possible, get out of the country, is driving the demand for Liberal Education. This 'upper-upper' middle class wants to get out of the country and fast: Therefore, a brand of liberal education, the sort that focuses on polite conversation and how to hold knife and fork (as Benjamin Franklin saw liberal education), has become popular.
Second, but it did not stop there. The imitation effect, which always drives private education institution (because they are unconcerned with long term externalities and public considerations), has now developed a theory of liberal education for the masses. It is predicated on the technological disruption of the workplace and the rise of 'relationship workers' instead of 'knowledge workers'. In this version, liberal education is not one without 'the end in mind'; rather, it is marketed as a surer way to career nirvana, a formula for success in the robot-dominated economy.
Unfortunately, whatever the truth of both the propositions, limiting the scope of a liberal education to the art of polite speech or to drive it for the purpose of an as-yet-undefined employment prospect changes the nature of education provided. Hence, most (though not all) liberal education courses on offer in Indian universities are shapeless jumbles, a series of unrelated courses put together without any plan or purpose.
Liberal education in search of a purpose
One could argue that liberal education is education is for the purpose of itself and attempts to put a justification, that this would make one economically active, for example, would impose an instrumental character on even the most well-intended enterprises. However, this is argument whose time has really passed: It's not the educator who imposes a purpose of education but rather the society and the learners themselves. Within an aquisitive, instrumentalist society, not defining the purpose of an educational engagement is a recipe for chaos; as I argued, this is what one sees in liberal education schools across India, the lack of a clearly defined purpose means students studying merely to pass exams and get the degree and enhance their individual prices in the marriage market.
However, it doesn't have to be this way. There are at least three reasons why Liberal education is desperately needed in India.
The first of these is historical. At the time of Indian independence, there was this assumption that India as a nation goes back many thousand years. However, the current landmass of the Republic of India was never a united political community, despite various cultural and economic linkages. So, the assumption of an Indian citizen, who was given the vote in the new Republic, was ahistorical, an ideal more than a reality. It's not unlike Italy, which shared a history and culture, but even after half century of unification, one had to say, "now that we have made Italy, we must make Italians." That 'making Indians' in the ideal of the Republic was a task left unattended. This should have been the first task of an universal liberal education.
The second is economic. The last two decades of integration with the global economy let the Indian policy-makers see its true nature: The 'global economy' is a post-imperial institution designed to keep every political entity - nation states - in their respective places in the global value chain. Indeed, it was very profitable for a few people in India for a limited period of time, but it has pushed the Indian economy and mindset in a psychological corner of permanent dependence. Being the 'global backoffice' is no longer a badge of honour when structures of work are changing and rewards are getting even more skewed in favour of a few winners. And, there is no escape: Any inversion of the value chain is enormously costly and beyond the wiles and resources of any private entity. The Hayekian world, where producers have no freedom but to conform to the structures of global value chain but consumers ecclectically enjoy the fruits of seamlessly integrated supply chains, has truly come to pass. Moving up this chain, as Indian producers now want the opportunity, is hard to achieve without first breaking the cognitive barriers imposed by the colonial experience. And, this Liberal Education could help do.
The third angle is cognitive and this is a well-rehearsed argument. There is nothing Indian about lack of originality in work, absence of sympathy, the inability to demonstrate basic ethical judgement or in conformity. And, yet, Indian institutions and enterprises are often plagued by all of the above. That Indian students do very well when given the opportunity, usually in universities abroad, to question, to create, to carry out exceptional professional work, should point to the soul-crushing instrumentality and conformity in Indian education. India has, ever since the creation of first English universities as agencies for government employment, been afflicted by illiberal education.
This last point, however, should also raise an important point: Liberal education is not defined by its content, but by its method. Throwing a few odd courses in philosophy and history in the mix would not make a liberal curriculum; it is how one teaches, assesses and sustains the communities makes liberal or illiberal education. Most Indian liberal education institutions miss this point: They throw in a few American-style courses in the mix and believe that they have offered a great liberal education curriculum.
Liberal education as a forward-looking enterprise
This confusion between content and method also makes the other great fallacy about liberal education: That liberal education is all about discovering India's past and should concern itself with disciplines such as philosophy, religion, history and the like.
It is worth clarifying therefore that liberal education, an education informed by the spirit of critical inquiry, emerged as a forward-looking enterprise, as an antithesis of scholastic education. Closely arguing textual interpretation is a method in liberal education toolkit, but this is to be done in the spirit of enquiry and criticism and not in deference to handed-down past and received wisdom. There are no, and nor should be, any sacred cows in liberal education.
This again brings us back to the question of method. One needs to construct a curriculum of thought, history and culture to ground an education for citizenship building, but the point of liberal education is to translate this knowledge into everyday manners of engagement and wisdom through critical engagement. Why should I study this is a perfectly legitimate question in Liberal education - in fact, perhaps the most important question - and misty-eyed nostalgia about the mythological and the bygone isn't part of its rules of engagement.
Making sense with liberal education
The tasks of a liberal education is various (liberate, animate, cooperate and agitate - as I described in an earlier post) but I see liberal education as a sense-making tool in contemporary India.
The liberal education that I am arguing about is not an antithesis of professional education, but rather its preparation. It's a method rather than a curriculum of study and hence, a strong case for liberal education doesn't mean banishing business schools but rather reimagining its method and purpose. If anything deserves tearing apart, it's the mindless imitation of American liberal arts that has taken over Indian education, producing the opposite of liberally educated individuals.
Modern life is complex. Often, living feels like living inside the Matrix, without control of our own realities. Contemporary India, as I often say, gives me the feeling of living inside a bad bollywood movie, which goes on and on, and the symbols and charades meaninglessly take over the field of meaning. Continuously making sense, as propaganda pervades everything and reality is bent to serve purposes of powers that be, is the only way to remain sane and remain human in the middle of this cacophony. This is what I see as the great project of a liberal education for India.
Popular posts from this blog
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
Introduction : The Business of Gift Giving 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 et al , 1991). Arunthanes et al (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 s
Buzzwords have disadvantages. Right now, experiential learning is one, and that means we put the label on everything and it stops to mean anything. Also, this means reasonable conversation about experiential learning becomes difficult - at times such as this, either you preach experiential learning or you are traditional, antiquarian and hopelessly out of touch. But, overlooking the limitations of experiential learning can cause big problems. Experiential Learning does many things - putting practice at the heart of learning is an important paradigm shift - but not everything, and it is important to be aware what it does not do. Usually, we equate the terms Project-based Learning (the method) with Experiential Learning (the idea) and Learning from Experience (the ideal), treating them as one and the same and using the terms interchangeably. Any talk about distinctive meaning of these terms is usually seen as pedantic, but really represent very different ideas about education.
Today, Helen Goddard, 26, a highly popular music teacher of a City School for Girls, has been sentenced to 15 months in prison. Her crime was to carry out a year long lesbian affair with one of her pupils, who appeared in the court and admitted that the affair was consensual and it was she who pressured Helen into the affair. For Helen, a bright musician and a devout Chistian, this is an extraordinary lapse of judgement. Also, she was teaching in the £13,000 private girls only school in London. She was surely aware what the consequences of her action will be. The fact that she still could not stop herself tells us that lovers do not always act rationally, something we always knew. There is more in this affair than personal tragedies. For a start, this has all the dramatic elements: a bright, beautiful teacher more in Julia Roberts mould [as in Mona Lisa Smile], a stiff upper lip school [not unlike Wellesley] and a story like Notes On A Scandal with an added twist. Indeed, Helen
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,
There is no other city like Kolkata for me: It is Home. The only city where I don't have to find a reason to go to, or to love. It is one city hardwired into my identity, and despite being away for a decade, that refuses to go away. People stay away from their homeland for a variety of reasons. But, as I have come to feel, no one can be completely happy to be away. One may find fame or fortune, love and learning, in another land, but they always live an incomplete life. They bring home broken bits of their homeland into their awkward daily existence, a cushion somewhere, a broken conversation in mother tongue some other time, always rediscovering the land they left behind for that brief moment of wanting to be themselves. The cruelest punishment, therefore, for a man who lives abroad is when his love for his land is denied. It is indeed often denied, because the pursuit of work, knowledge or love seemed to have gotten priority over the attraction of the land. This is particularly
Introduction: Hastings in the history of Indian Education Whether or not one includes Warren Hastings in the history of Education in India is a matter of perspective. If writing the history of education means writing the history of schools, the impact of Hastings' administration would be quite limited. If anything, the rapid implosion of local rulers in Eastern, Southern and Northern India during Hastings' tenure had meant a bleak period for the indigenous education system, as patronage and funds would have dwindled away for many of them. The Company administration really concerned itself with the schooling of the natives only after 1813, as Nurullah and Naik rightly pointed out ( see my earlier post ) and one can legitimately start the story at this point. However, if history of Education in India is to encompass the transformation of Indian Scholarship, on which foundation the new, colonial, system of Education would be built, the story must start with Warren Hast
Introduction Erna Petri née Kürbs, a farmer’s daughter from Herressen in Thuringia, arrived in Ukraine with her three year old son to join her husband Horst in June 1942. Horst, an SS leader inspired by Nazi ideologue Dr Richard Walter Darré, settled in the plantation of Grzenda, just outside today’s Lviv, to become a German Gentleman-Farmer. Erna saw Horst beating and abusing the workers in the plantation within two days of arriving there, which was, as Horst explained, necessary for establishing authority. Erna joined in enthusiastically, settling into a combination of roles of ‘plantation mistress, prairie Madonna in apron-covered dress lording over slave labourers, infant-carrying, gun-wielding Hausfrau.’  However, there were clear rules in the plantation, and Erna was very much expected to play the woman’s role of being a Cake-and-Coffee hostess. When four Jews were caught in the estate while trying to escape from a transport to a death camp, Horst told Erna and her female
I wrote a note on Kolkata, the city I come from and would always belong to, in July 2010. Since then, the post attracted many visitors and comments, mostly critical, as most people, including those from Kolkata, couldn't see any future for the city. My current effort, some 18 months down the line, is also prompted by a recent article in The Economist, The City That Got Left Behind , which echo the pessimism somewhat. I, at least emotionally, disagree to all the pessimism: After all Kolkata is home and I live in the hope of an eventual return. Indeed, some change has happened since I wrote my earlier post: The geriatric Leftist government that ruled the state for more than 30 years was summarily dispatched, and was replaced by a lumpen-capitalist populist government. Kolkata looked without a future with the clueless leftists at the helm; it now looks without hope. However, apart from bad governance, there is no reason why Kolkata had to be poor and hopeless. It sits right
The ‘Why’ Question? Adolf Hitler was appointed the German Chancellor by President Von Hindenburg on 30th January 1933. This was an extraordinary turn of events. Previously, President Von Hindenburg consistently refused to appoint Hitler the Chancellor, despite the impressive electoral performance of NSDAP in July 1932, Hitler’s uncompromising demand of the Chancellor’s post and a repeat election in November 1932 which failed to break the deadlock. Explaining his refusal, Hindenburg wrote in a letter on 24th November, “a presidential cabinet led by you would develop necessarily into a party dictatorship with all its consequences for an extraordinary accentuation of the conflicts in the German people.” The question ‘why’ Hitler was appointed Chancellor, despite the President being acutely aware of what might follow, is therefore a significant one. The NSDAP had election successes throughout 1932, and was already the biggest single party in the Reichstag and various Landtags acros
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.