November 2015

Ph

oto

Cou

rtes

y:

Har

shit

a S

inha;

Tak

en a

t JN

U,

Del

hi

2

Editorial Growing up, I was oft-told the story of Arjuna, the fear-less warrior who only saw the bull’s eye he was sup-posed to aim an arrow at. He didn’t see the sky, the clouds, the birds or any other object, living or non-living, and was completely focused. This should be the kind of focus I ought to have, they told me. Laser-like focus to get good grades, a degree, a well-respected and well-paying job culminating in a ‘dignified’ life. I had one question then, and it still hasn’t been an-swered. What becomes of the bigger picture when all of your energies are focused on getting a degree in a stan-dardised framework and then being on your way? Edu-cation as an institution is standardised in nations all over the world, but we are assured it is a life-long proc-ess that can’t be confined to the books we read or to the four walls of the classrooms we have to sit in. This to me is a paradox. This special edition of Beacon is centred on an issue that affects everyone, those who care and even those who don’t. India in 2005 offered to the World Trade Organi-sation to open its education sector to foreign and pri-vate players. In light of the withdrawal of the Non-NET fellowships of M.Phil and PhD candidates at government-run universities and given the fact that the Indian gov-ernment looks well on its way to turning the aforemen-tioned offer into an irrevocable commitment at the Tenth Ministerial Conference of the WTO to be held at Nairobi, Kenya this December, the masses are in tur-moil. To fuel the fire, the government has chosen to remain mum with regard to the ordeal. The Japanese government has chosen to disregard hu-manities and the social sciences in favour of more ‘productive’ technical courses. The intellectual movement, some people say, is losing its momentum. The question we must ask ourselves is whether education is being cast into atomised moulds being fettered to suit private interests. This is not just an issue. It is a crisis. A crisis the end re-sult of which will decide what will taught at colleges and universities, the kind of ethos a classroom ought to have and most importantly, the nature of the intelligentsia-to-be. The time to get up and be aware, not to mention proac-tive, is nigh after all.

A Reality Check KAVITA CHARAN P3

All About the Nairobi Deal AISHWARYA MALL

P5

Privatisation of Education: How is the US Handling it? NEETI PRAKASH AND TAHIRA BHATTI P7

Tête a Tête with Prof. Avijit Pathak

REEYA RAO P9

Education and the Government ANWESHA CHATTERJEE P11

Uthceare CHITRANGADA SINGH

P13

And Then There Were None SMRITI CHAUDHARY

P14

Hungry for Hegemony CHITRANGADA SINGH P16

INSIDE THIS ISSUE

3

Amidst this furore against cer-

tain commitments that are be-

ing scheduled to be made to

the WTO, the Indian govern-

ment is receiving flak for not

fulfilling its duties and safe-

guarding the higher education

sector of the country. Since an

act of criticism should be

backed by cognizance of the

subject matter, this article will

furnish the reader with the

facts of the same.

Here are the facts: India’s

higher education system is the

third largest system in the

world*, after United States and

China. There are 35,539 affili-

ated colleges, public or private,

in the country. **

Our present education system

mainly comprises primary edu-

cation, secondary education,

senior secondary education and

higher education. The central

government is responsible for

formulating and regulating ma-

jor policies relating to higher

education in the country. It pro-

vides grants to the UGC and

establishes central universities

across the country. The central

government has the means to

grant university status to pri-

vate institutions, under

the ‘deemed university’ cate-

gory. State governments also

have similar authority.

The state of education has im-

proved a lot over the past 68

years since the Independence.

However, there still remains

room for a lot of reforms.

The higher education system

has several setbacks, for exam-

ple, the enrolment rate (GER)

for Higher Education was 8.0%

in the year 2000 while the

global percentage was 23.2%.

Corollary to this, there are

large variations among the

various categories of popula-

tion based on gender, urban or

rural habitation and econpmic

standing. Also, the quality of

education is not exceptional;

the Nasscom-Mackinsey Re-

port (2005) had said that not

more than 15% of graduates of

general education and 25-30%

of Technical Education are fit

for employment. ***

This state of education led the

government and other institu-

tions (with their own vested

interests) to believe that priva-

tisation of higher education is

the best thing that they could

do. With the aim of privatisa-

tion of education, Mukesh Am-

bani and Kumar Manglam Birla

submitted a joint report titled

‘A Policy Framework for Re-

forms in Education’, to the

erstwhile NDA government.

The report focused on ways to

bring in reforms in the present

education system, they

wanted to “change our mind-

set- from seeing education as

a component of social devel-

opment to realizing that it is

a means of creating a new

information society, resplen-

dent with knowledge, re-

search, creativity and innova-

tion. It is not a social expendi-

ture but an investment in

India’s future.”

The higher education sector

of India is considered as the

‘sunrise sector’ for invest-

ment as it is a market worth

15 billion USD. Private play-

ers are eyeing the education

sector as they see education

as a ‘frontier market’ in the

emerging economies. The

World Trade Organization is

one such institution.

This organization has three

main multilateral agree-

ments. These are General

Agreement on Trade and Tar-

iff (GATT-1994), Trade-

Related Intellectual Property

Rights (TRIPS) and General

Agreement on Trade in Ser-

vices (GATS). Education is one

of the sectors listed under

GATS.

The main aim of GATS is to

promote trade liberalisation

of all kinds of services.

India has submitted its

‘offers’ for ‘Market Access’ in

‘Higher Education Sub-Sector’

to GATS in August 2005 as

A Reality Check Kavita Charan

4

part of the Doha Round Trade Negotiations.

Basically, when a country offers its education

sector to GATS, it commits to liberalise its poli-

cies for operation of foreign players in education.

The host country can’t discriminate between the

foreign and domestic institutions in term of sub-

sidies, qualifications, licenses, standards etc. It

will have to provide a level playing field to the

foreign universities and this will lead to rampant

commercialization and privatisation of educa-

tion. India has made offers but has still not made

commitments for the same because the WTO

negotiations were disturbed for over a decade.

The government set up various committees to

look into the offers and various committees ad-

vocated for investment from the foreign players

in view of lack of funds with governments.

According to the World Bank Data, globally 4.9%

of GDP was being spent on education in 2010

and India had spent only 3.3% of the GDP. Our

government is withdrawing its responsibility as

an education provider and is facilitating foreign

investment.

The NDA government is working on turning the

‘offers; into ‘commitments’ and this will be done

during the Tenth Ministerial Conference in Nai-

robi, Kenya (15th – 18th December). Once India

makes the commitments, under GATS, the for-

eign universities will be coming to India to make

profits only. These will further deepen the crises

of higher education of India as it is already over-

commercialized. The students will be turned into

consumers who would have to pay service

charges to receive any kind of higher education.

Unlike IMF and World Bank, there is little free-

dom for the members of the WTO and hence,

only little scope of revision at the ‘offer’ level, as,

once the ‘commitment’ is made, it will be irrevo-

cable.

The immediate ramifications of such a commit-

ment would be as such: the government would

stop subsidizing its own institutions, the privati-

sation of education would not only increase the

fees and exclude certain sections of society

from education but would attack the very char-

acter of knowledge. If the character of knowl-

edge is altered in such a away then only mar-

ketable knowledge will be popular.

And even if the government does agree to pri-

vatise this sector against popular disapproval, it

has to realise that for a smooth transition, cer-

tain provisions are to be made for institutions

that have for decades, relied on government

funding and special privileges. One doesn’t

make a child ride a bicycle without making

them practice with training wheels first. So,

where are the training wheels for our education

sector before it is forced to race around extem-

poraneously.

Sources:

*http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EDUCATION/

R e s o u r c e s/ 2 7 8 2 0 0 - 1 1 2 1 7 0 3 2 7 4 2 5 5 / 1 4 3 9 2 6 4 -

1193249163062/India_CountrySummary.pdf

**http://www.dreducation.com/2013/08/data-statistics-india-student-college.html

***http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EDUCATION/Resources/278200-1121703274255/1439264-1193249163062/India_CountrySummary.pdf

5

The World Trade Organisation

(WTO) is the only international

organization that deals with the

rules of trade between nations.

It was set up in 1995 with the

goal of making trade more effi-

cient, better organised and solv-

ing disputes between nations by

providing a framework of rules.

There are 162 members of the

WTO who come together to ne-

gotiate and decide upon these

rules regularly. Every two years,

this organisation hosts a ministe-

rial conference which is its top

decision making body. This year,

the Tenth Ministerial Conference

will be held in Nairobi, Kenya

from the 15th to the 18th of De-

cember. There is not enough

awareness surrounding the con-

ference even though this year

important issues with regard to

education, environment and ag-

riculture will be discussed. The

Director-General of WTO,

Azevêdo said that the 10th Con-

ference is crucial for determining

the future role of the organiza-

tion as a forum for trade nego-

tiations.

The conference this year deals

with issues of trade that affect

India directly. One of the main

issues that must be addressed in

this conference is that of the

Doha Declaration of 2001. The

Doha Declaration addressed

three main issues- of agriculture,

non-agricultural market access

and services.

The non-agricultural market ac-

cess includes the reduction and

elimination of tariffs on export-

able goods which include min-

ing products, fish, fish products

and forestry products. The de-

veloped and developing coun-

tries have opposing views on

this topic. While developing

countries are in favour of pro-

tecting the emerging indus-

tries, it is apparent that the

developed countries want to

make profits. With tariff bind-

ing being implemented, a ceil-

ing will be set and countries

will not be able to charge a

tariff higher than the one de-

cided upon, thus reducing

profits.

A successful outcome of Doha

looks like a long shot because a

key member in the organisa-

tion, USA asked the developing

countries to keep

‘expectations in line with real-

ity’. Many countries also want

to focus on the twenty-first

century ‘modern business and

trade’ issues which apparently

do not include agricultural is-

sues. Prime Minister Modi on

the other hand said that the

Doha Declaration will be pur-

sued and it was time for the

developed nations to be on the

backburner instead of those

which are still developing. Is-

sues related to the safeguard-

ing of farmers, food security

and subsidies in this sector will

also be addressed.

Yet another agreement which

will be pursued is the informa-

tion technology agreement

which was the first agreement

made in relation to the reduc-

tion and removal of tariffs on

products like computers, tele-

communications equipment,

semiconductors, software and

scientific instruments and the

accessories to these products.

In July 2015, the members de-

cided to expand the list of

products under this agreement

with 201 new products. The

new products include medical

equipment like ultra-sonic

scanning apparatus, GPS navi-

gation equipment and optical

lenses. With the expansion of

the ITA, the manufacturers

would gain accessibility, pre-

dictability and certainty of

products in the market because

the WTO members would have

to ascribe to not taking any

duties or customs.

The environmental goods ne-

gotiations relate to the reduc-

tion of tariff and non-tariff bar-

riers on environmental goods

like catalytic converters, air

filters and consultancy on

wastewater management. The

signing of this agreement will

simulate the purchase of envi-

ronmental products which will

aid in invention and improve

many countries’ ability to ob-

tain environmental technology

All About the Nairobi Deal

Aishwarya Mall

6

which will ensure cleaner air,

water and better sanitation.

GATS is an agreement which

was introduced in 1996 with the

main aim of removal of barriers

of trade in various fields like

banking, insurance, movement

of goods and persons and edu-

cation. The members of the

WTO are still free to choose

which sectors of market are to

be ‘liberalised’ i.e. privatised

and sold in the market. The

agreement also has the power

to decide the extent to which

liberalisation will take place in a

given period of time.

The documents available on the

WTO website fail to mention

anything about education as

being a part of the agreement.

A lot of information is provided

about the financial and move-

ment of goods and persons sec-

tors, yet no information is pro-

vided about what seems to be

an important part of the deal

under wraps. The government

might not acknowledge it ex-

plicitly, but its gradual retreat-

ment from what were strong-

holds of the public sector

(health and education, for in-

stance) are raising a lot of ques-

tions.

As mentioned in the docu-

ments, the financial sector

which includes banking, venture

capital, insurance and financial

consultancy will have unbound

access by foreign companies in

the national market. Venture

capital is needed by new start-

ups to establish themselves and

insurance is extremely impor-

tant for individuals. Foreign eq-

uity stakes can be up to 51% in

Indian financial companies

which in turn gives them im-

mense power to change the way

the companies work. Unbound

access will also be given to tele-

communication companies with

a 25% stake holding of Indian

companies by foreign compa-

nies.

Moreover, education will be

categorised as a commodity

which will make students the

consumers. The opening up of

the education sector will allow

foreign companies to establish

profit driven institutions in the

country which will bring down

the quality of education. A state

funded university will not be

given subsidies anymore

thereby making it extremely

difficult for students from eco-

nomically weaker sections to

have access to quality educa-

tion. As far as government in-

volvement goes, they will no

longer have the obligation to

provide state funded research,

institutions or keep a check on

the quality of education.

The 10th Ministerial Conference

brings with it some positives and

negatives. The Doha Declaration

along with Environmental Goods

Agreement gives India the op-

portunity to improve its situa-

tion in the agricultural sector,

whereas offer about the educa-

tion sector attacks the very

foundations of research, in-

novation and knowledge.

What is to become of the

thousands of small scale start

-ups and government-funded

colleges and universities is

unknown.

7

As the WTO Ministerial Conference in Nairobi,

Kenya approaches, a shiver of ambiguity rushes

through those who wonder how the popular

and much debated WTO-GATS agreement will

affect the accessibility and quality of education

in our country. Trade in higher education ser-

vices is a moneymaking industry, including re-

cruitment of international students, establish-

ment of university campuses abroad, franchised

provision and online learning.

The General Agreement on Trade in Services

(GATS) is designed to increase trade liberalisa-

tion internationally, and includes ‘education’ as

a part of the service sector. Some view GATS as

a positive force, accelerating the influx of pri-

vate and foreign providers of higher education

into countries where domestic capacity is in-

adequate. Other take a more negative view,

concerned that liberalisation may compromise

important elements of quality assurance and

permit private and foreign providers to mo-

nopolise the best students and most lucrative

programmes .

In the past, India has welcomed privatization in

many arenas yet somehow privatization of edu-

cation raises a question mark on the implica-

tions it will have on India’s education. To get a

better picture of the consequence such a step

might have one our education system and poli-

cies we look at a country that is already under-

going such a change - The United States of

America.

In the United States, the Federal Department of

Education is primarily responsible for setting

and education finance. Students have a choice

between free tax-funded public schools, or pri-

vately funded private schools. The defining dis-

tinction between public and private schools is

their different sources of support. Public

schools depend primarily on local, state, and

federal government funds, while private

schools are usually supported by tuition pay-

ments and sometimes by funds from other

sources such as religious organizations, endow-

ments, grants, and charitable donations.

Much of the argument for market reforms in

education revolves around the assumption that

private governance results in higher student

achievement at similar cost when compared to

public governance. US-based studies have

found that students in private schools signifi-

cantly outperform their public school counter-

parts. However, many studies also indicate that

the difference in achievement may have little to

do with how a school is funded and governed

rather, it may depend on other variable, includ-

ing the student’s socio-economic status (SES),

parental education, community support and

peer group.

Since the WTO-GATS agreements focuses more

on higher education it becomes necessary to

understand the implications of privatization on

universities. Much like schools, the United

States also has a well-developed system of uni-

versities, both private and public.

The quality of education at both public and pri-

vate universities varies but not by a large mar-

gin. Private colleges keep classes small, with

easy access to professors as opposed to public

universities where up to two hundred students

may be enrolled in some classes. One example

of a large public university is Ohio State Univer-

sity, home to 42,000 undergraduates. Accord-

ing to many surveys, the curriculum of both

private and state universities is set along the

same lines even though one is not set by the

government and the other is.

The main difference between the two kinds of

universities is the funding they receive. Private

Privatisation of Education: How is the US Handling it?

Neeti Prakash

8

universities charge much higher tuition than

their public counterparts, which rely on state

funds to make up the difference. Tuition and

fees for a public four-year institution cost

$20,823 for the 2011-12 school year –– about

$8,000 less than private institutions. Private

institutions rely almost entirely on tuition and

the generosity of donors, which is why students

wind up paying more. One of the main con-

cerns of anyone seeking higher education is

financial aid. In the United States, student loan

funding is jointly managed by the Department

of Education directly, called the Federal Direct

Student Loan Program (FDSLP) and commercial

entities such as banks, credit unions, and finan-

cial services firms .Some colleges may not ac-

cept either, in which case students must seek

out private alternatives for student loans. Pro-

grams like the Pell Grant Programme which are

used to provide funding for higher education to

students with financial need, who have not

earned their first bachelor's degree, or who are

enrolled in certain post-baccalaureate pro-

grams, through participating institutions, are

the main sources of grants. Federal loans are

subject to income-based payback, fixed interest

rates, and take nine months to default on, mak-

ing them a much safer loan for students to

take.

Conversely, private loans in the US have done

away with late fees, and in the fine print have

redefined the right to claim default on the loan

after missing a single payment. Tuition is rising

at both public and private universities alike,

which means more students in the US are

forced to take on student debt to pay their

way. For the 2010-11 school year, 57% of public

four-year college students graduated with stu-

dent loan debt, of $23,800. Private students

were worse off, with about two-thirds of alum-

nus leaving school nearly $30,000 in debt.

In the United States, privatization of education

has been on the agenda for many years now.

Many believe that competition, emblematic of

the private sector, is the best guarantee for

the best outcomes. Competition compels par-

ticipants to adopt the most efficient means

and maximizes motivation by threatening ex-

tinction if a company does not excel. For many

Americans, education offers a tremendous

source of profits when private, for-profit com-

panies are allowed to move in. This line of

though gels in well with the capitalist society

of USA. In India, however, there are mixed re-

actions about the steps being to privatize edu-

cation. Many believe in education is a process

that should not be controlled by companies

who are obligated to share holders and profits

instead of students. However many are also of

the opinion that to improve the standards of

education in our country a large investment is

required. In the given context, according to

many Indians, there is a pressing need for the

Private Sector to pitch in and that at the risk of

privatization and monopolization of higher

education by the Private Sector.

Much like the US, there has been severe de-

bate in India regarding the issue of privatiza-

tion of education. It was only after US Presi-

dents like George. W. Bush and Barack Obama

privatized many domains like the supply of

food, the infrastructure for housing soldiers,

the use of special security forces, that privati-

zation of education was welcomed in their so-

ciety albeit reluctantly. In India, however, this

sort of support privatization is found only in

very small pockets of the society. In a society

like ours that advocates socialism and hence

an equal access to essential resources like edu-

cation, pushing education in the private do-

main can increase the already existing dispari-

ties in India. Privatization of education may

deny many in this country their fundamental

right. Education has always been a top priority

for the country and how we deal with privati-

zation may change the entire game. Will India

be destined for education or privatized profit ?

Let’s wait till December to answer that.

9

In our endeavour to probe into

the matter for further understand-

ing, we went to the Jawaharlal

Nehru University to interview Pro-

fessor Avijit Pathak.

Professor Pathak - who has been

teaching at the Centre for the

Study of Social Systems, School of

Social Sciences since 1990 - has

devoted his interests to and writ-

ten profoundly on topics such as

modernity, globalisation, educa-

tion, knowledge in a multitude of

books he has authored such as

Globalization and Identity: To-

wards a Reflexive Quest; Recalling

the Forgotten: Education and

Moral Quest; The Rhythm of Life

and Death; Indian Modernity: Con-

tradictions, Paradoxes and Possi-

bilities; Discontents of a Culture

and Social Implications of School-

ing: Knowledge, Pedagogy and

Consciousness.

Hence, it was rather enriching and

riveting to know of his trajectory

through different stages of life, his

thoughts on the relationship be-

tween academia and activism, the

receding role of the state from the

sectors of health and education, as

well as privatisation of education

which is consequential to the De-

cember WTO Conference.

Q1. How has your experience

with education played out- as a

student, then a teacher, a re-

searcher and finally a writer?

In my linear stages of develop-

ment in terms of formal institu-

tional education, there were ex-

periences which were pleasant

and there were some which were

not-so-pleasant. So, out of the

mixed bag as a student, when one

begins to teach, all these experi-

ences are there in one’s mind;

and, as the process begins and you

come to the class everyday and

make an effort to make it more

lively and meaningful for the stu-

dents. Whether we teach History,

Mathematics, Sociology or Physics,

teaching as a profession means

engaging with human souls and

educating them and I believe, this

is the essential mission of teach-

ing. However, with time, there is

no engagement. Teaching is also

become commodified and priva-

tised and a teacher is being re-

duced into a kind of a hired expert,

knowledge provider, service pro-

vider and student, a consumer.

But, a teacher-taught relationship

is not that of a producer and a

consumer, it is a deep relationship

which collectively constructs the

world and evolves it. The day the

logic of the market enters into it

and begins to pollute it, there is

something very deep about educa-

tion which will be impacted.

Q2. Are there any new elements

in the current education system?

If so, what are they and how are

they different from when you

were a student?

It is paradoxical, on the one hand,

a lot of new facilities are there, all

over the world, also India, like the

school education today, and on

the other, the sort of teacher-

student relationship, the mechani-

cal way of learning – rote learning,

mechanical way of examination

and have emerged after a lot of

research on Education and the

metaphor of nature has become

absent. Also, the different poten-

tial of the child is not allowed to

take birth because of the notions

of competitiveness and survival of

the fittest, also as even after get-

ting marks as high as 96%, people

are depressed because they are

still not eligible to take admission

to colleges, say, Shri Ram College

of Commerce. The emerging sys-

tems such as CBSE might get one t

o score 100/100 in English without

Tête a Tête with Prof. Avijit Pathak Reeya Rao

10

laying one’s hands on a beautiful

short story. So, at one level new

sensibilities are emerging, teachers

are coming in with these kind of

sensibilities, but on the other hand

pathologies are becoming intensi-

fied. For instance, there is more

and more theoretical awareness

about air pollution yet on the other

hand, the business of car compa-

nies and flyover mafia’s are going

on. Hence, it is paradoxical.

Q 3. Education as a process keeps

changing. How is that visible here

at JNU?

There are three components of

meaningful education, firstly, incul-

cation of social knowledge, tradi-

tions, secondly, skill training and

thirdly, spirituality. JNU when came

to be in the late 1960’s and early

1970’s was one of those universi-

ties where all disciplines were

taught. The Birla and Ambani Re-

port was a changing point in the

1990’s as they exerted that there

should be self-financing courses,

more in-tune with the market. And

then came about the National

Knowledge Commission (2005)

which reiterated the same ideas.

However, as seen in private univer-

sities, quality of education im-

parted, faculty and teaching are not

up to the mark. The kind of knowl-

edge’s taught are decided in such a

manner that social sciences such as

Sociology, History, Economics, Life

Sciences won’t be taught and in-

dustrial management, biotechnol-

ogy and such courses will be taught

as they are in tune with the indus-

tries. I am not saying that knowl-

edge should not be in tune with the

industries, as, a component of edu-

cation is skills, but education is

more than just that as one’s knowl-

edge should be socially meaningful

and it won’t be possible unless

foundation knowledge’s are not

built up. The coming WTO Confer-

ence is not just about the strike of

the UGC, it is far deeper as it legiti-

mises the education which is in-

tune with the corporate. The cor-

porate only needs jobs which are

instrumental in the growth of the

corporate. Hence, technology is

needed to empower people and

not disempower them or take

their job. So state-funded universi-

ties like JNU are necessary, my

father being an honest govern-

ment servant, we didn’t have any

extra money and I could get edu-

cated because the state took care.

Apart from the damage privatisa-

tion does to knowledge, it will

further increase the inequality in

society and push many into the

debt trap. It is a very difficult time

and ironically, the sweet coding

being employed is ‘development’,

but, what is development? Is it

just an abstract figure of number?

These are questions we need to

ask ourselves.

Q4. How would you look at the

production and dissemination of

knowledge in a privatised setup

from the vantage point of sociol-

ogy of knowledge?

If we ask, who defines what is the

most legitimate knowledge that

should be disseminated? If a world

of global capital and increasing

corporatisation of the world. For

example, Sociology is not taught

private universities and if it is

taught, it is taught in a way which

will be conducive for the corpo-

rate. So, to see what is happening

today has to be seen in a larger

political scenario. Research will

also be in-tune with the demands

of the corporate, teachers will be

asked to produce projects, and the

funds one gets to conduct the

research will be dictated with a

corporate agenda. The act of be-

ing a teacher is political, as they

ought to be democratic and even

spiritual in a higher sense of the

term as it implies in engagement

with human souls, it is a relation

of love.

Q5. What do you think should be

the relation between academia,

teaching and activism?

I think teachers and public intel-

lectuals must take part in larger

issues, as they are a part of poli-

tics and society. One kind of activ-

ism could be that of joining a po-

litical party one and other could

be disseminating ideas, public

debate, writing in newspapers,

visiting colonies after colonies. I

sincerely believe that college pro-

fessors should come to different

housing colonies and conduct

small meetings and clear things,

because, today what is happening

is there is no meaningful conver-

sation. So, we must explore activ-

ism, and it is sad that we don’t, in

the case of JNU too, we have not

succeeded in transforming it into

an eco-sensitive or car-free uni-

versity. It could have become an

example for surrounding colonies

as well, and this is how the rela-

tionship between university and

community would be established

through a certain kind of practice

and this also becomes one kind of

activism. Young minds like you, as

the Sociology department under

the brilliant guidance of Anjali

(Professor Anjali Bhatia, HOD of

Sociology) should organise work-

shops for students and parents of

surrounding schools growing up

in the popular culture should be

made to see things like there is

world and music beyond Honey

Singh, without moralising it and

encourage deeper understanding

and stimulate activism within

yourselves.

11

“Education is the most powerful weapon which you can

use to change the world."

Nelson Mandela

Education is one of the fundamental markers for gaug-

ing the level of development of any country. To be-

come truly advanced, a country needs to invest in its

human capital to harness its full potential. It is only

through quality education that this is possible. Educa-

tion increases the productivity of people and helps

develop technological and entrepreneurial skills. It is

probably the only way by which the social and eco-

nomic inequalities can be eradicated.

Since the end of the British rule on 15 August, 1947

the literacy rate in India has taken a six fold leap from

a mere 12% to 75% according to the Census of

2011.Inspite this,India is far behind the world average

literacy rate of 84%. What accounts for this dismal

state of education in our country? One of the reasons

for this can be the undue attention that has been given

upon being 'literate' rather than being 'educated'. Lit-

eracy simply means to be able to read and write. How-

ever, education is acquiring knowledge to enhance

one's ability to reason and make sound judgements.

Going by this, 75% of people by the end of 2011 could

pick up a pen and write his/her name, but how many

of them were educated in the truest sense?

On 1st April,2010 the Parliament of India brought into

force the Right to Education Act which provided for

free and compulsory education to children from the

ages of 6 to 14.

Before probing into the pros and cons of the RTE Act,

we must look into the precursors of this Act- The Na-

tional Literacy Mission and the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan.

The National Literacy Mission (NLM) was a nation-wide

literacy programme launched in 1988 to provide edu-

cation to 80 million illiterate adults between the age of

15-75 over a period of 80 years. Initially, the NLM had

two programmes under it- Total Literacy and Post liter-

acy. Total literacy aimed at total education for each

individual. Post literacy was the programme which

aimed at providing skills and resources to the newly

literate people so as to consolidate the learning proc-

ess. Later on the two were coalesced into a single pro-

gramme.The NLM had its first successful run in the

Kottayam city of Kerala.The programme gained many

laurels and the UNESCO in 1999, conferred on it, its

Noma Literacy Prize.

The SarvShikshaAbhiyan(SSA) implemented in 2001

under the aegis of Atal Bihari Vajpayee aimed at uni-

versalizing elementary education within a limited

time period of 10 years - for the children of the age

group of 6 to 14 years - so that every child in this age

group gets 8 years of compulsory schooling by 2010.

This scheme goes back to the 1993-94 District Pri-

mary Education Programme (DPEP) which aimed at

achieving universal primary education in 272 districts

in the country. The present goals of this programme

are to open primary schools in areas which do not

have any educational facilities, to strengthen the

infrastructural facilities of the existing schools, to

provide for adequate teaching faculty so as to main-

tain a healthy teacher-student ratio and to provide

quality elementary education with a signifaicant fo-

cus on girl's education.

Through the Constitutional Amendment of 2002,

article 21A was included in the Constitution, making

Education a Fundamental Right. This amendment

necessitated the drafting of a separate Education Bill

to specify how this will be implemented and this is

how the RTE Act came into force. For the first time in

the history of India, a law was brought into force

with a speech by the Prime Minister. Dr.Manmohan

Singh spoke the language of hope when he said that

irrespective of gender, social and economic barriers,

every individual was entitled to education.

This historic law puts the State under obligation to

ensure compulsory admission and completion of

education by a child without having to pay any sort

of fee to the concerned school authorities. One of

the few highlights of this historic act were, the fact

that it was made mandatory for private schools to

have 25% of its seats reserved for children from un-

derprivileged backgrounds. However, minority insti-

tutions do not fall under this provision of reserving

seats. The Act prohibits the school from holding back

or expelling any student. It also has several pro-

grammes for the training of drop outs to bring them

Education and the Government

Anwesha Chatterjee

12

at par with the rest of the students. The RTE Act is the first legislation in the entire world which puts responsi-

bility on the Government to ensure that children are getting education. In this sense, it is truly a benevolent

and revolutionary measure to ensure welfare of the citizens. Then why has such an Act failed to bring about the

desired change in literacy levels in India?

On 1st May, 2011 over 500 parents congregated near Jantar Mantar to protest against the arbitrary hiking of

fees in private schools and the extremely low quality of education provided in the government schools. The

parents demanded the enactment of a law to formalize the fees to be charged by the private schools and also

to raise the standards of government schools to the level of Kendriya Vidyalayas (Central Schools).

On 2nd October ,2015 over 1000 girls in three government schools in Bhim, Rajasthan launched an agitation

against the lack of teachers in schools. The school which had a strength of 700 students, had just 5 teachers to

impart "education".The protesters claimed that due to a gross inadequacy of teachers, the pass percentage in

these schools had dropped down to less than 50%. The government had instructed the schools to observe

Swachch Bharat Mission but the students went against this directive by organising a peaceful march to the sub

divisional magistrate's office. The agitations had very little effect since the school still has only 4 teachers. The

SDM had promised to take measures but all his promises turned out to be ineffectual.

Hundreds of students from fourteen Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA) schools in Wayanad district

of Kerala protested against the pathetic state of education. Their only demand was to Appoint Teachers.

The RTE has been criticised on several fronts. Educationists have pointed out that the Act was hastily drafted

without adequately consulting different education groups. The Act does not put any emphasis on the quality of

education being provided. It also completely ignores children less than 6 years of age. The RTE might ensure

that a child can write his/her name but the long desired dream of 'Education for All' is still a far fetched vision.

Government schools account for almost eighty percent of education instutions but their quality remains poor.

They are continuously riddled with absenteeism, lack of teachers and infrastructural facilities.Even people from

economically weaker sections of the society prefer private schools today due to the satisfactory standard of

education provided there. Educationists have argued that the Act does not really provide free and compulsory

education. In contrast it only reinforces the already present inequalities and discriminations.

Keeping in mind the several loopholes of the RTE, it is evident that this flawed Act needs to be modified or

needs to be replaced by an alternative and more efficient Act. The RTE allows private institutes to hike its fees

at their discretion, which is only leading to rapid commercialization in the sector of education. This provision

further widens inequalities in the education system and makes the Common School System seem a presposter-

ous vision. The need of the hour is an entirely public funded system of neighborhood schools which will ex-

pand the dream of Education in its true sense. The All India Forum for the Right to Education Act (AIFRTE) is a

national forum spread over 16 states that clearly sets out its demands for amendments in the Bill. The forum

demands the immediate withdrawal of all those Bills in the Parliament that aims at making education an arena

for profit making. The Forum also speaks about the WTO Conference to be held in Nairobi this year and de-

mands that the deal which is slated to be signed for making education a tradeable commodity be withdrawn

without further delay before it becomes irrevocable commitments of the nation.

Education is a Fundamental Right. If it is reduced to a saleable product, then it will surely be a loss for the na-

tion.

13

14

Students have been in uproar

over the removal of non-NET

fellowships given to M.Phil

and PhD research students by

the University Grants Commis-

sion (UGC) and trying to get

their demands met by the

“OccupyUGC” protest. The

withdrawal of a basic stipend

to research fellows seems like

a direct attack on the humani-

ties and social sciences and as

the government is seeking to

increasingly privatise the

sphere of education, these

fields will be the first casual-

ties of the war on knowledge

and education.

But this cannot be viewed in

isolation. It has to be seen in

relation to the WTO-GATS

agreement on higher educa-

tion. If the Government of In-

dia signs it this December in

Nairobi at the WTO ministerial

meeting, it commits to its of-

fers of ‘market access’ to

higher education, whereby it

reduces education to a trade-

able service.

This also has to be examined

in the larger context of the

growing indifference towards

Humanities and the Social Sci-

ences by governments all over

the world who want to pro-

mote only the STEM (Science,

Technology, Engineering and

Mathematics) subjects which

are seen as more productive in

comparison to others.

According to the GATS (General

Agreement on Trade in Ser-

vices) agreement, education

becomes a service for which

students pay a service tax to

access it. Moreover, WTO-GATS

places education on the same

plane as recreational services

like pubs and hotels. If the gov-

ernment of India does not re-

tract this offer well before the

Nairobi conference, this offer

will become a commitment and

education policies, instead of

being handled by national

autonomous bodies like the

UGC, will have to be con-

structed along WTO guidelines.

WTO does not allow govern-

ments to discriminate between

national/government-run insti-

tutions and private/

international ones, thus wishing

to create a level playing field

for foreign and commercial in-

vestors in education. This will

lead to decreasing subsidies

and increasing tuition fee of

government colleges and edu-

cation norms in India will be

dictated by corporations who

see the domain of Indian Higher

Education as only an industry

capable of immense returns

and students as consumers of

this service being provided by

them. And with the marketisa-

tion of education, it will steadily

become unaffordable and out

of reach for the majority of In-

dian students. Australian uni-

versities which are the leading

establishers of offshore

branches of their institutions

are known to provide a sub-

standard quality of education in

their programmes abroad in

comparison to their parent in-

stitutions.

Education can never be seen as

a commodity which can be

traded in an open market be-

cause it is something vital to a

nation’s cultural, social and

economic development. As

soon as the market or even au-

thoritarian governments start

impinging on academic free-

dom, the intellectual growth of

the country slumps and the

space to freely question and

enquire becomes threatened.

The Japanese government re-

cently issued a dictum to all its

government universities to re-

duce or altogether eliminate

their academic programs in the

humanities and social sciences

and to direct their resources

towards disciplines that “better

meet society’s needs”. And 26

of the 60 universities will com-

ply to some extent with the

proposal.

We can expect the same to

happen in India as India already

has a prevalent culture which

favours job-oriented vocational

And Then There Were None

Smriti Chaudhary

15

courses over academic ones and once educa-

tion gets commercialised, investors will seek to

see returns on their investments, meaning that

only such market-oriented courses such as

technical ones will be on offer.

This is because students of such disciplines

seem to be more employable and more capable

of contributing to the GDP of the country and

adding to the profits of the corporate investors.

Even in the UK, universities are being trans-

formed from centres of learning to centres of

profit as the humanities are being abandoned in

favour of science and engineering.

Even research scholars are being heavily super-

vised and audited by a growing managerial and

administrative class which advances the UK

government’s belief that the humanities and

social sciences are impractical and outdated. In

November last year, Nicky Morgan, the British

secretary of state for education, speaking to

group of teenagers said, “If you wanted to do

something, or even if you didn’t know what you

wanted to do, then the arts and humanities

were what you chose because they were useful

for all kinds of jobs. Of course, we know now

that couldn’t be further from the truth – that

the subjects that keep young people’s options

open and unlock the door to all sorts of careers

are the STEM subjects”.

But knowledge cannot be seen with utilitarian

ends in mind. Knowledge, as the #OccupyUGC

protestors have proclaimed is “not for sale”.

Educational institutions are the physical mani-

festations of humanity’s need to learn and

question. They have to exist outside the pur-

view of any autocratic authority, whether it’s a

quasi-fascist government or a profit-hungry cor-

poration. Both will intend to steer the produc-

tion of knowledge into directions that will bene-

fit them and them only and stifle the insatiable,

curious mind.

The Indian government only spends one percent

of its GDP on higher education and it further

wishes to decrease this expenditure through pri-

vatisation. But education is not a luxury and it

cannot be one. It is a necessity and a basic hu-

man right. And all of this will be undone if the

current and imminent education reforms are

here to stay.

16

The History of the Peloponnesian War recounts

the Melian dialogue; Thucydides propounded the

earliest sustained realist explanation of interna-

tional conflict thus developing the first theory of

international relations. Hans Morgenthau’s Poli-

tics Among Nations rejects ‘moralistic’ ap-

proaches to international politics and mentions

that ‘political man’ is innately selfish with an in-

satiable urge to dominate others.

In the post-1945 world, the USA was the chief

architect of the United Nations (UN), the Interna-

tional Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Bank.

During the late 1970’s, the World Bank and the

International Monetary Fund developed a new

approach to promote development through

structural adjustment programmes all over the

world.

These programmes were launched as a result of

the debt crisis in several developing countries.

The poorer countries borrowed heavily from

western banks and other private bodies which

were flush with ‘petro dollars’ because of the

dramatic hike in oil prices introduced in 1973 by

the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Coun-

tries (OPEC).

The increase in interest rates and the slowdown

in the world economy, partly due to the world oil

crisis, resulted in economic stagnation across

developing countries thus making payment of

debts very difficult. Many developing countries

borrowed from the IMF to deal with the pay-

ments and from the World Bank to fund develop-

ment projects. The IMF and the World Bank im-

posed conditions into the provision of any future

loans; the purpose of these loans was to build a

market-oriented ‘structural adjustment’ of eco-

nomic policy congruent with the principles of

neo-liberalism.

These facts, when connected, suggest that the

world oil crisis was artificially constructed

mainly by the USA in order to maintain its he-

gemony. In 1951, Iran nationalized its oil indus-

try, then controlled by the Anglo-Iranian Oil

Company; Iranian oil was subjected to an inter-

national embargo. The USA, in an endeavour to

bring Iranian oil production back to interna-

tional markets suggested the creation of a

"Consortium" of major oil companies known as

the ‘Seven Sisters’, namely- Anglo-Persian Oil

Company (United Kingdom), Gulf Oil (United

States), Royal Dutch Shell (Netherlands/United

Kingdom), Standard Oil of California (United

States), Standard Oil of New Jersey (United

States), Standard Oil Co. of New York (United

States), Texaco (United States).

Anthony Sampson’s The Seven Sisters describes

the oil cartel (five out of seven member compa-

nies belonged to the USA) which tried to elimi-

nate competitors and control the world’s oil

resources. This Consortium artificially induced a

drastic hike in oil prices which lead to an in-

crease in interest rates thus making debt pay-

ments for developing countries impossible. The

IMF and the World Bank, along with the USA,

emerged like a power-puff team out to save the

economically stagnating developing countries.

The structural adjustment programmes at-

tended majorly to the interests of the USA,

which was seeking opportunities to expand in-

vestment, than to the crisis in the developing

countries. Consequently, countries such as the

USA, Germany, Japan, and, recently, China,

adopted policies of free trade and economic

liberalization once they had achieved a level of

economic maturity which ensured that their

domestic industries were not vulnerable.

Agreements such as GATS (General Agreement

Hungry for Hegemony

Chitrangada Singh

17

on Trade in Services) and TRIPS (Trade-Related

Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) legitimise

hidden protectionism in form of non-tariff barri-

ers which is made stronger in the name of pro-

gressive liberalism.

Contrary to the praxis, according to structural

adjustment programmes, an open economy is a

pre-requisite for development but this in the

case of major donor states was a consequence

(with special reference to USA’s ‘isolationist’ po-

sition).

The World Trade Organization (WTO) is often

criticized for the biases that operate in favour of

developed countries. Due to a consensus-based

system of decision-making, the developing coun-

tries face a disadvantage as they may have no

permanent representation at the WTO’s Geneva

headquarters or their delegations may be much

smaller than those of developed countries.

Developed countries mostly bring issues to the

notice of the dispute settlement panel as the

plaintiff party dumping allegations against devel-

oping countries generally concerning unfair trad-

ing practices.

In 2000, a proposal by the USA circulated to

Members of the Council for Trade in Services

aimed to stimulate discussion and help liberalize

trade in the tertiary education sector in the

world economy. The purpose of the same was to

remove and reduce obstacles in the path of

transmission of such services across national bor-

ders through electronic or physical means thus

contributing to the global spread of the “modern

knowledge economy”.

Members were (and are still) invited to inscribe

in their schedules “no limitations” on market ac-

cess and national treatment as foreign suppliers

of the concerned services face certain obstacles

resultant from domestic regulatory provisions

thus obstructing ‘comfortable marketing’ of their

services.

Referring to the Marxist perspective,

The USA plays the role of the powerful elite

(bourgeoisie) and the developing countries con-

stitute the non-bourgeoisie. The arbitrary

dominance exercised by the USA was created

(and is still an on-going process) through the

manipulation of the superstructures of society

i.e., the way people are influenced (religion,

education, law, politics, et al.). If this does not

work, then the USA (akin to the bourgeoisie)

attempts to crush the non-bourgeoisie party by

means of embargo or military intervention for

humanitarian aid or the protection of democ-

racy supported by the cause of collective secu-

rity.

The USA, like Athens, will destroy itself if it

stays hungry for hegemony.

18

Editor

Puja Shukla

Sub-Editors

Reeya Rao Chitrangada Singh

Photographer

Harshita Sinha

Correspondents Anwesha Chatterjee Neeti Prakash Aishwarya Mall Tahira Bhatti

Team Beacon

Contact us at: beaconlsr@gmail.com

Our Website:

www.beaconsociology.weebly.com

Background Courtesy: Tejasvi Kashyap