We need to broaden our vision and take the debate on education beyond what is deleted from or added to NCERT textbooks.

AS I reflect on the recent controversy over the reported removal of the Preamble to the Constitution from select NCERT textbooks, I realise once again the significance of the politics of knowledge. Possibly, it is not easy for the ruling regime to free itself from the alliance of religious nationalism and market fundamentalism, or the politics centred on the cult of a narcissistic/potentially authoritarian personality. Not surprisingly, you and I need not be surprised if the establishment feels somewhat uncomfortable with the grand egalitarian/secular ideal the Preamble articulates.

However, as a teacher with a keen interest in pedagogic practices, I do not want to remain confined merely to what has been deleted from school textbooks. My question is whether the prevalent pattern of classroom transaction is capable of making the young learner understand and internalise the significance of the Preamble, even if it is included in these textbooks. As teachers and educationists, we should reflect on this pedagogic question more seriously rather than getting carried away by the rhetoric of the debate between the government and the Opposition.

In this context, I feel tempted to refer to the experience of a workshop in which I got an opportunity (thanks to Vikash Sharma of the Shiksha Swaraj initiative) to interact with a group of Class-XI students in the hinterland of rural Bihar. Well, their NCERT text of political theory begins with the Preamble. I asked them to read and feel every word of the beautifully written Preamble: “We, the people of India, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic…” Well, they read it; and I was not sure whether they could make sense of it. In a culture of rote learning and exam-centric education, this grand vision of the kind of India we wish to make, I feared, has already been reduced to a mere ‘fact’ — soulless, and without any enchanting power, or just a two-mark question in the board examination. But then, I didn’t give up; I sought to intervene; and I wanted them to think and reflect. I asked them a simple question: “Do you see democracy in your family, or in your village?” They remained silent for quite some time. It was not surprising. The teacher’s monologue in the classroom in most of our schools, or the disappearance of lived experiences from our classrooms creates a culture of silence. Seldom do the students get an opportunity to see beyond the frozen words stored in the textbook, articulate their own experiences and ask new questions.

I was aware of this difficulty. Yet, I kept trying. And eventually, some of these students began to speak. “There is no democracy in my family. My father takes every decision. We have no voice,” a girl finally spoke. This gave me an opportunity to make them reflect on patriarchy and how it negates the spirit of democracy — democracy as dialogue, art of listening and the process of collective decision-making. Furthermore, I wanted to make them think whether democracy as a way of life can exist in the grand political system if it is not practised in our families, villages, schools and society. Yes, this conversation began to stimulate them. And this time a Dalit girl came forward and asserted confidently. “There is no equality in my village. We are looked down upon; we are stigmatised” — her voice convinced me that education is about asking critical questions and interrogating the taken-for-granted world. In the process of this free-floating conversation, they brought the experiences of lived realities and felt encouraged to see beyond bookish knowledge.

At this juncture, I asked them yet another question: “Do you think that the Preamble is just a garland of noble words, and the way our country operates is far from this grand vision?” Initially, they were silent or possibly confused. I kept waiting for their response. And then, a girl began to speak: “There is economic inequality in India; there is ‘Hindu vs Muslim politics’; and there is caste oppression. But then, India should try to become like what the Preamble visualises.” And this inspired me to make a couple of observations and conclude the session.