October 22, 2006

A GOOD education system is one of the pillars for developing a modern state. The manner in which ideas are formed and disseminated through the educational system impacts the formation of the character of the students. The syllabus taught at schools, colleges and universities is an indication of how policymakers plan to form the character of the nation’s future generations.

The need to bring about a change in the school syllabus was conceded to by the present government. However, despite the hue and cry regarding the syllabus and the almost nationwide debate conducted on the issue, the syllabus suffers from the same problem and reflects the same myopia that a number of people had complained about.

The issue of an outdated school syllabus initially came to the forefront because of a report of the Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI) published in 2004. The writers had pointed out flaws mainly in the school syllabus highlighting the manner in which facts were omitted, the concept of war and violence was propagated and a peculiar perspective that advocated bigotry, xenophobia, and discrimination towards fellow citizens by minority groups was inculcated. The debate, which followed after the publication of the said report, forced the government to review the syllabus. However, given the power and influence of ultra-conservative elements in policy-making, a change could not be brought about. In fact, the federal education minister, Ashraf Jahangir Qazi, assured these anti-reform forces that the concept of jihad would not be removed from the school textbooks.

The problem, as it appears by looking at the currently taught school syllabus, is that what is being taught to the younger generation does not help in developing a sharp analytical capacity or provide the youth with a varied world view. In fact, what is being taught in the schools does not empower the young minds to contribute towards producing a modern nation-state that can undertake scientific and technological development or become a partner of other nations in the world.

The limited world view, which is being fed to the students, becomes very obvious by opening any textbook, starting with English. The textbook used in class 10 in Punjab and federal boards for English, for example, can easily be mistaken for a book on Islamic studies. Out of the 21 lessons given in it, nine are on the lives of, or refer to, the lives of religious personalities, or are about religious festivals, and another three are about Pakistan. The book is a reminder of the days when English books contained stories and poems that presented a different world view to the students. The poems of Wordsworth or stories such as “Rip Van Winkle” and others, which were about another culture and civilisation, are no longer taught.

What was the importance of the syllabus prior to the dark days of General Ziaul Haq? The text used, especially for teaching the English language, was meant to open the minds of students to the presence of other cultures and social systems. Although the cultural milieu of the old text was foreign, it served the purpose of broadening the mental horizon of the youth who did not have access to the “other” world. So, even if the average student could not ever hope to travel around the world, s/he could, at least, understand the norms and ways of the world outside. Today, the English syllabus taught at government schools or used by the public sector boards is full of divisive material. There is an almost deliberate effort to divide the elite and the non-elite populace. While the elite schools teach much more diverse texts and encourage the students to take O’ and A-level exams, which provide a fairly better view of the world, those using government board books are confined to a limited view of the world.

Therefore, it is not surprising that such school a system produces students, who, by the time reach the tertiary level of education, only possess a restricted view of their own society and that of the outside world. The public sector school system is where the seed of discrimination, xenophobia and insecurity are sown. The Pakistan Studies text, in particular, tends to draw a distinction between “our” world and the “other” world.

The situation does not improve in the universities either, especially when it comes to social sciences. Teachings in the various aspects of politics, history, sociology and security studies are primarily based on a classical realist paradigm, according to which the state is a monolith and all decisions and policies are governed by the state’s narrow perceptions and priorities. Moreover, according to this framework, states are power-maximisers which are governed only by their own interests. In the same manner, individuals and domestic institutions play for power gains.

These university students are absolutely in the dark about other theoretical paradigms such as structuralism, neo-structuralism, post-modernism, neo-liberalism and others. Despite the HEC ranking of the public sector universities, the fact remains that the students produced by even the top universities such as the Quaid-i-Azam, University — especially the social sciences faculty — they do not compare with universities abroad, not even India. This is not to suggest that all Indian universities produce the best material. In fact, a lot of universities in India produce sub-standard material. However, there are some where the quality of research is noticeable mainly due to two facts. First, the academic staff is allowed the intellectual autonomy to pursue research. Second, students are taught about alternative paradigms which sharpen their research skills and allow them to see history, politics, arts and culture from varied perspectives. Indeed, it is debilitating to see the world from one lens of classical realism alone.

I learnt from my recent teaching experience at Quaid-i-Azam University that Research Methodology (RM) is not one of the strengths of the social sciences department. In fact, the faculty and students tend to view research methodology as a matter of learning the ordinary nuts and bolts of research — giving references in papers, footnoting and other such mundane things. However, RM is the crux of all social science learning. It teaches people how to evaluate historical and political issues by using different perspectives. The primacy of a single paradigm, classical realism, thus, blinds the people to all other realities and adds to their myopia.

It is also a fact that there is almost an absence of people trained in teaching RM in public sector universities in Pakistan. This not only creates a deficiency, but also compromises the standards of teaching and research. Students do not recognise any other theoretical paradigm which means that they are unable to interpret or understand the world from any other angle but the one which only allows them to see the world in black and white. The world is divided between friends and foes. According to this perspective, those that are not with you are naturally against you and, hence, the demonisation of the “other” becomes essential. Interestingly, the issue of war and conflict or peace is also seen in a monotone. So, one would come across women students who would refuse to also consider the cost of nuclear deterrence from a feminist perspective. The apparent insensitivity towards the negative cost of nuclear proliferation such as the loss of life should not surprise any one, especially after taking a look at the school and university syllabus and the teaching methods.

What is taught in the social sciences faculty in public sector universities is a by-product of years of indoctrination. The manner in which history of the subcontinent is taught at schools bears witness to the fact that the prevalent world view given to the students is that of a world divided between Dar-ul-Harb and Dar-ul-Islam. The view is inherently fundamentalist like that of the Christian and Jewish fundamentalists, or similar to the simplistic view of American president George Bush. Unfortunately, this perspective not only breeds violence and hatred, but also deprives the viewer from noticing the larger beauty of the world around us.

The writer is a defence analyst

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)