Observations on the Report submitted by the School Curriculum & Syllabus Committee constituted by the Government of West Bengal 2011
At the very outset it should be recognised that , the draft-report of the school curriculum & syllabus committee is a historical document that breaks away from Colonial legacy in education; addressing the present context of emerging liberal society. In appreciating this report studied and articulated in remarkably brief time, what attracts is its presentation format; broken down into segment with repetitive mentions appears to have resulted by the absence of a central theoretical premise that could have articulated entire set of recommendations within a logical sequence. I trust this draft report should articulate a structured document in the form of State Curricular Framework, which will be followed by a State syllabus for elementary education and the other for High school education. SCF document by that argument would provide direction for articulating SCF for Teacher education and an Administrative policy statement.
The last mention would be important for the report is suggests a different curricular approach that requires a shift in approach in managing the affairs. After all, managing the curriculum has to be the business of the administrative support system. This is to mention here that shift from ‘memorising’ kind of learning that is technically known as Acquisition model of learning is fast disappearing from developed countries and replaced by Constructivist model. The theoretical premise behind these distinct models of learning has been identified by Rabindranath as late as by more than 100 years. He identified these two models/approaches as ‘Sangraha’ and ‘Nirman’. In this year of 150th Birthday of the poet-educator we could have paid our respect recognising his ideals of education approaching the same ideals of learning. Returning to the issue, the present administration system inherited from colonial time perhaps needs a change in approach conducive to the sustenance of the proposed system approach and values enshrined in this model. Without this change in administrative support system, the very difference in approach may not find itself secured. In fact, need for a systemic approach in management reform is an issue that is mentioned in the report, legally speaking this requires further deliberations for there are some clause and by-laws in The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009 that was not dealt in the recommendation either in favour or dropped. Perhaps a clarification for not accepting those section of the Act need to be added before exposing the final document to legal debate and criticism of the civil society.
There is no difficulty to understand the idea/s behind the recommendations argued by common knowledge but the issue of theoretical premise for proposing the same becomes important while critiquing them from an academic perspective. Trusting academic tradition of objectivity of knowledge such an attribute is to open up further possibilities with option to extend and develop. For an example the pedagogy of learning English as second language the report proposes a method that in a way an improvement of Pabitra Sarkar Report. Interestingly, not in the former report or in the present report there is any mention of the theoretical basis of such recommendation. The absence, makes this decision arrived more out of subjective consideration than an objective validity. Interestingly, Acharjyo Brojendranath Shil proposing the same theorized the premise objectively [or scientifically as is often said] more than 100 years ago. Acharjyo Shil perceived- “We learn language in short more by learning it spoken than by artificial exercises in Syntax or Idioms—conversation, questions and replies to questions… . Constant and familiar use of certain simple forms of clauses and phrases, the sentence taken as the unit of speech rather than the word, the co-operation of the tongue and the ear in reciting page after page, these are surest, the most rapid and the most powerful means of learning a foreign language. They are the conscious imitation of unconscious process by which we learn our vernacular in infancy. (Note on University Reform submitted to the Indian Universities Commission.) Pioneer in Linguistics studies in this country, Acharjyo Shil praised in this connection the effort of Rabindranath for the language primers he wrote—Ingraji Sopan/’Steps to English’. As a matter of fact, it is the same approach proposed in the present report as it is in three part publication of English primer printed more than 100 years ago. Achajyo Shil found these primers are carrying successfully the ideas of the theory he proposed. The poet as educator not only had spent his creative energy but tried this method for some time before publishing, he claimed, the method is field-tested. The State document on education’s being oblivion to the past experience however is symptomatic; many theorists observed that a post-colonised society in parting away with the memory of colonisation often tends to forget the radical ideas that inspired the force of anti-colonisation spirit. Hopefully, the final version of SCF would find theoretical inspiration from our celebrated past.
The report took every opportunity in proposing the learning process free of intimidating, norm-abiding climate that prevails in the present classrooms. Many of the structural-sociologists had found the root of such subjugation of mind and body as build within the very structure of the classrooms, the physical space. This is to point out that both the NCF and this report deliberating on constructing learning space focussed on mental space and missed the issue of physical space that again reminds of the colonial legacy and that again very much an apparatus of Acquisition model. This assertion in one hand, acknowledging the proposed curricular approach as Nirman model as opposed to Sangraha underlines the importance of a theoretical framework for proposing a policy statement on education. On the other hand, claims the very structural attributes of a learning space as an apparatus of the same Sangraha model that the report appears to have rejected in favour of a liberal education as premised in the primary objectives of the report compilation. This is to recall here that this is an aspect in child education that Rabindranath had persuaded most creatively in creating a democratic physical space for learning. The idea through time has attracted imagination of liberal and progressive educators in the country and outside. It may not be a wishful thinking only that the State in proposing it’s first ever Curriculum for school education shall learn from Rabindranath in the year of his 150th Birthday celebration.
Finally, I would point out that the report although suggests different teaching methods in connection with different syllabus content, the report do not gives a clear view on Teacher’s education that would be critical in building capacity of the teachers already in the service and the new recruits. Secondly, even this report suggests a diversity in approach in streaming school education from upper classes the suggestions are not enough to understand the approach. Vocationalising education for an emerging economy is cardinal to develop human resource. I hope the final document would present a clear view of this streaming out provision. May be, the groups working on Technical education in the state would be included in designing the approach of integration and streaming.
No comments:
Post a Comment