March 27, 2005

Only a fraction of our literate population enjoys the privilege of university education. If we are to progress as a nation in this fiercely competitive world, higher education, without reshaping the truth, must be made accessible to every citizen

SOME people say, history is to a nation what memory is to an individual. But to limit the process of historical writing and interpretation to fulfil certain needs and aspirations of a particular nation or a state is a folly for which that very nation eventually pays a heavy price. What K.K. Aziz points out in his famous Murder of History needs to be mentioned here: “History ought to be above the laws of governments and whims of paid scholars. It should present facts as if they were divine edicts, beyond cavil, clear and crystal ... Even when the ashes of controversy are still hot, the icy brilliance of the historian’s reason should explain the conflict with humour, serenity and balance.”

How far this ideal is followed in our education system is no more a secret. Murder of History (1993) was no doubt an eye-opener. However, numerous articles, particularly in our English press, have been published to point out errors and misinformation regarding historical facts in our prescribed textbooks taught from class I to XIV. Last year, the SDPI Islamabad initiated a meaningful debate with the publication of a report on education. All these efforts are extremely appreciable as they highlight a very fundamental irregularity that is poisoning the brains of our youth and creating hurdles in the way of building a progressive society.

Nevertheless, the state of affairs at our higher education institutions, particularly at our public-sector universities, is not all that dark. Despite many unfavourable circumstances, teaching history as a social science is not very disappointing and there are reasons to remain hopeful.

The purpose of writing this paper is to highlight some trends in teaching history at the university level and to point out some basic hindrances and problems faced by the faculty and students in this context.

Before coming to the actual content, form and method of historical teaching and research at our higher education institutions, it will be helpful to assess the aptitude and attitude of the majority of youth wanting to study history as a discipline. First, it must be admitted that in this era of commercialization, history, like many other social sciences, is losing attention and interest of the general public as well as of decision-makers. Hence, to choose history as an optional subject for higher studies is ‘not profitable’ and desirable.

Moreover, pathetic treatment of the subject at school and college levels where defective textbooks are the only instruments of imparting knowledge, makes it sound as a dry and dull discourse. Actually, since the ’60s, teaching history at primary and secondary school levels has been abandoned and replaced by courses of social studies and Pakistan studies. These courses are a mixture of history, geography, civics, Islamic studies and international relations, with a particular approach, purpose and ideology. For every level there is a rather jerky selection of chapters on carefully chosen historical events and personalities. Hence, they fail to develop interest in the young minds.

Then at the college level, further indoctrination through the compulsory Pakistan studies courses proves to be repulsive, particularly to the majority of students who are preoccupied with science subjects. Even for those who opt for arts or humanities, history, unlike economics and journalism, seems to be a dull and futile exercise. (Here it must be noticed that the majority of private colleges and institutes mushrooming everyday does not offer humanities at all).

The ridiculous distinction between ‘Islamic history’ and ‘general history’ has made the subject more ambiguous. In the context of emotionalism prevailing in our country related to everything that is ‘Islamic’, there is a general trend of opting for Islamic history “for a better understanding of Islam”.

In these circumstances, when a youth seeks admission to a public sector university, history is one of the least wanted options. Ironically, the number of undergraduates and graduates admitted to the department of history at various universities is quite large, thanks to a comparatively low and flexible qualification criteria. Therefore, every year we see a multitude of newcomers dejected and demoralized, ashamed of their admission and continuously seeking transfers to other departments. The majority has no background of history and many feel content with their superficial and rather spurious knowledge of what was taught to them as Pakistan studies. The raw material history departments of the universities are getting each year is thus, literally, raw.

Once on the campus the newcomers are exposed to a plethora of influences. Many fall prey to petty politics of political organizations. Yet, the majority manages to attend classes and hence the learning process somehow commences. With this starts another process, that is, of surprises — sometimes pleasant and sometimes painful. The process of breaking of idols and shattering of ideals. Very soon students begin to understand that the previously gained knowledge of history was misleading and inadequate, and a new world of truth is waiting for them in classroom, libraries and at seminars.

It’s not because the faculty and the facilities available at the campuses are perfect and flawless. Rather it’s far from it. The very fact that our universities have retained a degree of intellectual autonomy through thick and thin makes a great difference. There was indeed a time when these prestigious institutions produced great scholars. Historians of repute taught and guided the young people using their expertise. Those great men are no longer with us, but their tradition is still there — though not as vigorous as it used to be.

There are many factors that verify the above statement. First, university education is still to a great extent outside the sphere of the “prescribed textbook” and so far the attempts to homogenize contents of the syllabi all over the country have not materialized. Students are usually provided with a list of standard books whose writers are considered authority on their particular fields from all over the world. Further reading and discussion is usually encouraged and questions are often welcomed. Integrity of the teacher is still respected to a considerable extent and hence his or her right to set the examination paper according to his or her wish. This nullifies the role of five-year papers, guess papers, readymade notes and private tutoring. Attending lectures and consulting books are the only way to pass the exams.

Secondly, various misconceptions regarding history are gradually clearing away. History is dull, dry and difficult to understand; history repeats itself; history is a chronicle of past events with no application to the present and the future; history revolves around ideologies — all now prove to be mere myths. Moreover, it’s not just the history of one country or one nation, but the history of the whole world and humanity. For instance, the history of European Renaissance is preceded with an account of ancient glory of Greek and Roman cultures and the Dark Ages of the Mediaeval Europe dominated by the clergy and the feudals. Growth of slavery, class system, feudalism, and church are eye-openers. Then the conditions that led to the great revolutions of history and their aftermath, the wars of imperialism and the wars of independence, the rise and fall of civilizations, empires and religions tend to be not only interesting, but also thought-provoking for the young ones.

Throughout the course, be it the history of ancient India or contemporary Central Asia, mediaeval South Asia or modern Europe, the Middle East or the US, a comparative approach with respect to our present situation is almost inevitable. Last, but not least, the history of our freedom movement and the contemporary history of Pakistan since 1947, is the last nail in the coffin of previous indoctrination. Here, students are encouraged to consult independent and world-renowned scholars from Theucydides to Toynbee and Plato to Ibn-i-Khuldun and Karl Marx. Also, an ever-increasing list of contemporary authors like Amartya Sen, Ashis Nandy, Hamza Alvi, Irfan Habib, Romila Thapar, Mubarak Ali, etc is included in the baggage of graduating students. Moreover, students are often required to write term papers on various issues related to their respective courses. After going through such a vigorous exercise virtually nothing of the old brainwash remains in the minds which are freshened up with new ideas and spirits.

Here, the question arises: how should young students, who have been groomed since their childhood to develop a certain mindset, respond to this new process of learning facts? It is a general experience that the majority remains quiet and rather submissive, thanks to the earlier training of behaving with extreme obedience to authority. Many are baffled, but abstain from challenging the teacher due to the lack of confidence.

However, there is always a minority that dares to ask, at times quite blatantly, why should they believe in the stuff which is contradictory to what they had been taught throughout their lives? Most common questions are asked regarding issues like theories of physical evolution of man, role of religion in life and politics, innocence of Muslim rulers and treachery of infidels against the “innocent Muslims”, the two-nation theory, the role of army in the defence of geographical and ideological frontiers of the country, the dismemberment of Pakistan and the failure of democracy in Pakistan etc. For a sensible teacher the answers lie not in another kind of indoctrination, but in initiating a debate which leads the challenger to the treasure hidden in the various sources of knowledge available in print and online. Soon, a new world of knowledge is dawned upon him and brings a new understanding and enlightenment. After all, universities are not supposed to be centres for indoctrination, but centres for learning. History equips its seekers with necessary tools to find out the truth from under the layers of the earth or between the lines of loyal historians like Abul Fazal.

Some major hurdles in this process of enlightenment are unavailability of required reading material, particularly research journals, inability of students to utilize material available in English, and the lack of access to Internet sources.

Moreover, the general apathy of society towards historical facts often tends to have a demoralizing effect on young minds, particularly the girls who are often punished for thinking independently. Many a time, youngsters are admonished for criticizing the existing setup of society or even labelled as wayward thinkers, even traitors. However, with the passage of time these hurdles seem to have diminished.

Finally, the most disturbing fact is that only a fraction of the literate population of our country enjoys the privilege of university education. And even for the majority of university students who are studying sciences and social sciences other than history, there seems to be very little chance of correcting many misconceptions. So, the damage done by the earlier indoctrination through defective state-sponsored textbooks often proves fatal.

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)