NEP 2020 and IKS: A Perspective

 

A bird’s-eye view of possibilities and challenges.

In today’s knowledge-driven economies, access to quality education and the chances for development are two sides of the same coin”, said Borge Brinde (2015), President of the World Economic Forum[1]. He also said, “Today’s students need ‘twenty-first-century skills’, like critical thinking, problem solving, creativity, and digital literacy. Learners of all ages must become familiar with new technologies and cope with rapidly changing workplaces”. 

Quoting an OECD report, he said that “providing a child with access to education and the skills needed to participate fully in society would boost gross domestic product (GDP) by an average 28% per year in lower-income countries … for the next 80 years”. It thus became a must for governments to design constructive ways to improve the quality of education and, importantly, make it accessible to everyone. 

Amidst these hard realities, the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 was formulated keeping in view the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations Organization. It focused on the importance of developing cognitive abilities such as problem-solving and critical thinking among the students. It also stressed the importance of lifelong learning and offered the facility for multiple entry-exit to enable students to complete the degree at any stage of their life. 

This policy, which has “the rich heritage of ancient and eternal Indian knowledge and thought” as its “guiding light”, replaced the 34-year-old National Policy on Education of 1986. It also desires that “these [our] rich legacies to world heritage must be nurtured and preserved for posterity and researched, enhanced and put to new uses through our education system”. 

Thus, ever since the NEP 2020 was introduced Indian Knowledge System (IKS) has become the focal point of discussion among academia. Like any other civilization in the world, our civilization too had a rich history of cultivating knowledge: In Srimad Bhagavad Gītā, Lord Krishna says knowledge is the great purifier and liberator of the self (4. 33, 37, 38). 

The Harappan civilization distinguished itself with technological development that was necessary for urbanization. It had brick-built houses, grid pattern of roads, drainage system, granaries, etc. The Vedic age that succeeded Harappan civilization gave birth to great literature: Vedas, Vedanga, Upanishads, Vedanta, Puranas, etc. All these texts were composed mnemonically and stored and maintained in the mind, and transmitted orally.   

The notable advances in science in ancient India, however, happened in the post-Vedic period: Susruta and Charaka laid the foundations for medical sciences; Panini formalized Sanskrit grammar; Bhrigu and Parashara developed astrology; and Kautilya made significant contributions to the political organization of society. 

Later zero and place value system of writing numbers were introduced in the 2nd-3rd century CE. Following these inventions, mathematics advanced by leaps and bounds. Aryabhata, Varahamihira, Brahmagupta, Sridhara, Bhaskara-II made seminal contributions to arithmetic, algebra, and trigonometry. Steelmaking was mastered later. Sadly, this progress in science, however, started declining after the 9th century and it almost became nil after the 11th century.   

Now the question is: Can we teach calculus from Aryabhatta’s writings, algebra and trigonometry from Brahma-gupta’s works, and spherical geometry and positional astronomy from Bhaskaracharya’s texts? Can we integrate medical knowledge of Charaka and Susruta into modern medicine? Can Panini’s linguistics and Kautilya’s economics be woven into today’s academic curricula? 

A probable answer to these questions is, of course, a qualified but definitive ‘Yes’. For instance, Brahmagupta’s Brāhmasphuta siddhānta contains lucid descriptions of algebraic concepts, including solutions to linear and quadratic equations, rules for arithmetic operations with zero and negative numbers; rules for working with fractions and series, etc. 

However, teaching from these ancient texts poses many challenges. Brahmagupta wrote all this in classical Sanskrit verse, using terminology and symbolism that differ markedly from modern algebraic notations. Indeed, he described operations verbally rather than symbolically. They do not provide step-by-step proofs or worked examples as is standard in modern pedagogy, for these texts were written for learned audiences.   

So, effective teaching of algebra or any branch of mathematics from Brahmagupta’s writings calls for careful translation, adaptation to modern notation, and thoughtful contextualization for today’s learners. The same holds true for the Śulbasūtras, which offer detailed geometric rules for constructing fire altars with precise right angles, directly applying the modern Pythagorean theorem. Likewise, texts by Aryabhata, Bhaskara, Varahamihira, etc., also call for a similarly nuanced approach. 

Effective pedagogy, therefore, is a must. Faculty must design methods that bridge ancient expression with modern understanding. This calls for both the ingenuity of faculty and a deep appreciation of the original text’s context and intent. 

Here, it is pertinent to appreciate the argument put forward by some of the teachers. They say that man’s scientific understanding of nature and society has advanced so significantly since the Vedic era that revisiting these ancient texts for instructional purposes may offer limited pedagogical value. While this is a valid concern, it need not negate the cultural and historical significance of these works. Exposing students to their intellectual heritage can deepen their sense of identity and foster a richer cultural appreciation. 

That said, a key question remains: Would such integration place an undue burden on today’s students? Pandits argue that, if taught effectively and with the right pedagogical approach, these ancient Sanskrit texts could actually enhance critical thinking among students—moving beyond rote memorization toward deeper intellectual engagement. Still, much depends on the capability and preparation of the teaching community. 

It is in order here to take note that most of these texts are in Sanskrit—a language that very few of today’s academicians understand well enough to use them as source material for effective teaching. Secondly, most of these texts are in the form of Sutras (aphorisms). While Sutras are renowned for their richness, depth, and brevity, their interpretation is likely to pose a significant challenge for today’s teachers who may lack an understanding of the historical and cultural context under which they were composed.  

Furthermore, once these texts are translated, it becomes essential for educational technologists and subject faculty to collaboarte in developing appropriate pedagogical approaches to facilitate effective teaching and learning.   In this context, it becomes necessary to recall the observation made by Thankamma Thankachan et al. (2010) in their paper, “Managing Shortage of Teaching Faculty for Technical Education in India”. They assert that teaching faculty are the “pivot around which the whole teaching and learning process revolves in an educational institution”, and that “shortage of quality faculty is currently acknowledged as the most critical problem”.   

In contrast, integrating Vedic philosophy, ethics, values, Sanskrit Kāvya literature, Panini’s grammar, etc., into liberal arts education presents fewer obstacles, for much of this material is already available in English and various other Indian languages. There is also a better understanding of these classics among the learned.  Panini’s grammar with its formal rules and meta-rules has played a significant foundational role in the development of formal language theory, which is integral to computer languages, compilers, and natural language processing. Indeed, scholars like Noam Chomsky have acknowledged Panini’s influence on formal language theory. Inclusion of Sanskrit literature enriches contemporary liberal arts curricula. 

Here, it is pertinent to take note of an interesting controversy sparked by the Union Health Ministry’s announcement to launch an “Ayurveda-allopathy integrated MBBS course” at JIPMER, Puducherry, with the aim of “broaden [ing] perspectives in holistic medicine”. The Indian Medical Association (IMA) raised strong objections, arguing that Ayurveda and allopathy are fundamentally different systems with “conflicting diagnostic and treatment approaches”. They contend that these differences make forced integration problematic, even though NEP 2020 encourages interdisciplinarity in education. So, the IMA argues for the parallel development of both systems, with mutual respect for their internal coherence and integrity. 

One of the central concerns raised by the medical fraternity is the lack of standardization and scientific validation in Ayurvedic medicines and practices. Integrating Ayurveda with modern medicine, without rigorous clinical research and regulation, could pose risks in terms of efficacy and safety. Theoretical complexity, limited access to experienced practitioners of Ayurveda, and language barriers, especially with Sanskrit texts of Ayurveda, make its learning more challenging.  Additionally, such integration might lead to cognitive dissonance among students and practitioners who are expected to reconcile fundamentally different approaches to diagnosis, treatment, and patient care. Looking at all these incompatibilities, there seems to be some merit in the IMA’s request to reconsider the government’s proposed plan for an integrated medical course, which they have termed a “regressive step”.    

Interestingly, a historical parallel can be drawn here from the 19th century. During the time of Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar—educator and social reformer—mathematics in Indian schools was taught using Bhaskaracharya’s Līlāvatī and Bijaganita. Recognizing that this approach was limiting students’ exposure to modern mathematical concepts and methodologies, rendering them weak in the subject, Vidyasagar introduced contemporary textbooks[2] to align the teaching of mathematics with the needs of a modernizing society. 

In light of these considerations, a more balanced conclusion could be: IKS have immense historical and cultural significance and can be highly enriching when introduced as part of a history or philosophy of science curriculum. Rather than serving as primary source material for technical or clinical education, they may be better positioned to help students appreciate the evaluation of scientific thought in India and its global contributions. Such an approach would preserve their educational value while avoiding the pitfalls of premature integration into modern scientific teaching. 

To sum up, let us bear in mind that Newton was responsible for much of classical mechanics, and yet, we are not using his Principia Mathematica to teach mechanics to students.

---

[1]          https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/07/why-education-is-the-key-to-development/

[2]    Soumitro Banerjee (2022), “Indian Knowledge Systems: The Central Plank of the New Education Policy”, Breakthrough. Vol. 22, No. 5, February.

Reopening of Schools: How Prepared We Are to Deal with Unintended Consequences?

Irrespective of the epidemiology of Covid-19 that varies from one place to the other, our education system consisting of schools, colleges and universities was shut across the nation under a uniform policy, since March 2020 to almost August of 2021. This has no doubt created a sort of educational emergency in the country. 

During the closure, some schools have, of course, offered on-line teaching. There are also reports indicating significant number of on-line “learning-sessions” (3-17 bn) and “learning-minutes” (37.85 bn) during the closure.  But as the studies carried out by private organizations/NGOs reveal that most of the teachers are unprepared for remote teaching, one is forced to wonder if these metrics really mean anything.

Over it, the youngest and the poorest students were to struggle a lot to catch up with the online classes owing to lack of devices or lack of knowledge-support from the family to handle these gadgets to learn the lessons, to submit the homework and to write the tests. In the process, no wonder, if many children from such families had given up learning.

The woes of these children, if examined dispassionately, are not just limited to availability/ non-availability of gadgets alone. With the pandemic-induced lockdown causing job-losses or the death of the breadwinner caused by the novel coronavirus made many children from lower strata either ending up in caring for the sick/younger siblings or work for pay.  The net result of the loss of formal learning for more than a year is: further widening up of educational inequalities in the society.

Tragically, this is not the end of the list of difficulties faced by millions of children hailing from the poorer sections. Due to this lengthy closure of schools, these children were to forego their midday meals. This had resulted in malnutrition which is sure to impair their cognitive abilities. And this is bound to reflect on their future learning prospects. 

Against this backdrop, a group of 56 experts—academicians and doctors and intellectuals from other professions—requested the government to consider reopening of schools and resume in-person classes for, “younger children are least at risk.” Their contention is that vaccination of children should not be considered as a prerequisite for reopening schools, since children are at a relatively low risk of severe or fatal Covid-19. And that is after all what the vaccination too is affording: prevent severe illness and death. So, they urge the governments to strike a balance of risks, which in their opinion, indeed favors opening of schools.        

Thus, governments have finally started reopening schools, colleges and universities. In a way it sounds pretty encouraging. Simultaneously, it also rings alarm bells for, there are multiple challenges—known and unknown—likely to emerge that call for effective management.

First things first:  observing Covid-19 appropriate behavior in the schools. Each school must prepare and be ready with a support plan to ensure safety of children. Testing temperature of children at the time of entering the school, enforcing wearing of mask, maintaining distance and proper ventilation in the classrooms, disinfecting school environment, particularly areas that are frequently touched and ensuring availability of hand hygiene facilities are the minimum requirements that schools, particularly government schools must cater to.  

As a uniform policy, students were promoted to next grade, though syllabus was not fully covered, merely based on their class-tests, etc., and hence there arises a need  for offering a kind of ‘bridge-courses’ to students to cover-up the learning losses. In the same vein, schools that offered on-line teaching  may have to offer a sort of ‘remedial-courses’ to such students who could not avail the on-line offerings owing to lack of infrastructural support.  How geared up our schools are first to identify the gap,  then structure bridge-courses with appropriate syllabus and offer support coaching to impart learning is a big question mark.  But the danger of pushing up students through to the next grade without offering such learning being obvious, this gap needs to be addressed with due diligence.

Finally, let us take a look at the health support system available for the students. Although children are said to be less prone for severe or fatal Covid-19, should contrary happen, its broader impacts on society as a whole will be catastrophic.  The experience of the US that had opened schools recently, particularly with Delta variant, appears to be different from common expectations. Also, we do not know the long-term effects of the disease on children, particularly children with malnutrition and other comorbidities. Another threat that the school-going children pose is that they can become ‘super-spreaders’ of the disease.

In the light of these threats, public health support system must gear-up to ensure that students—children, adolescents and young people—have easy and quick access to Covid-19 testing, quarantine and treatment facilities. Specially equipped hospitals with appropriately trained medical staff for treating young patients—isolated from parents—of Covid-19 are to be created and schools/parents to be kept informed of such centers to avail their facilities, should a need arise without loss of time in running from hospital to hospital.

But the big question is: Have we made these arrangements adequately? The answer is anybody’s guess!

Education: The Worst Victim of Corona Pandemic

The Coronavirus Pandemic has caused amazing shifts in our style of living: social distancing, “Touch me not” advises and ultimately lockdowns. Perhaps, the worst effected segment of our life by the Pandemic is education: schools, colleges and universities are closed by the governments across the States in their anxiety to cut the virus spread, children are caged in the houses with no scope to play even, students in some States were promoted to the next level with no exams, while University examinations all over the country are postponed and no one is sure when and how they will be conducted.

Of this segment, again it is the school children who are the worst affected. Millions of them have lost their lifeline: midday meals. Over it, children from low-income groups with no stable home have to attend to the family chores, look after the elders or siblings, etc. No wonder if they are forced into child labour even. Over it, if there is domestic violence coupled with parental substance abuse or a mental disorder, the risk of child abuse goes up.  There are thus serious health consequences, both mental and physical, to keeping schools closed for long.  All this simply complicates the calculus of reopening schools. And the unfortunate truth is there is no easy answer to this growing tragedy. 

Over it, shifting teaching to online for the school children during the lockdown. This is almost certainly worsening the educational inequality. It is so obvious that families from low income sections of the society lack a computer and broadband internet access at home. Many of these families live in small spaces that hardly can afford them a space to sit with computer and stay focused on the school transmission/lesson. Nor do parents have ability to help students with their school work. Thus, the practical, technical and emotional challenges faced by these children are many and they are acute too.

Here, it is very pertinent to remember the fact that education is a powerful driver of development and one of the strongest instruments for reducing poverty and improving health, gender equality, peace, and stability.  And if that is what we believe in, there is much else to be done in terms improving digital infrastructure and its accessibility for the population at the large before shifting to online teaching, particularly at the school level.

Turning our attention to the very on line classes, it appears that there is an assumption underlying the introduction of on line classes about teachers’ ability to implement remote learning. But research indicates that the present crop of teachers having had very little or no learning experiences online, might “lack models for planning online learning experiences” for their students. Hence, according to Volkan Yuzer and Eby Gulsun (2014), this very newness of the online learning landscape poses a challenge to teachers. Whereas, like any other good teaching practice, online instructional planning too must focus on student learning and this, education technologists say, calls for special effort from teachers backed by sound research.

Online teaching moves away from top-down lecturing to passive students to a more interactive, collaborative approach whereby students and teacher co-create the learning process. Distance learning calls for such student-cantered approach where under, students actively construct new knowledge as they interact with the teacher as also among themselves. As Jean Piaget, the Swiss philosopher said, teachers as facilitators must help students develop their own understanding of the content. 

Such an approach towards teaching obviously, compels teachers to question themselves: What kind of personal interactions students need with their peers and teachers? Do I have the necessary wherewithal to teach the prescribed content in a creative and authentic way? What level of freedom should I grant students to learn interactively in a democratic online classroom? Do I have the competency to host the lesson in the virtual environment of LMS? What kind of preparation do I need to make for teaching online? How to invite feedback from the students and test their understanding of the lesson? Being first-timer, can I foresee what a creative and effective online course look-like?

It is through such self-introspection and acquiring right answers thereof alone, online teachers can plan for and teach in such a way that it ultimately empowers and engages learners actively, which in turn enable them to work individually, cooperatively and collaboratively towards acquisition of knowledge. And if the online teachers are to create such a compelling and powerful instructional-learning environment that effectively caters to the needs and interests of students they must first be aware of research-driven frameworks and standards which they can practice while handling the technology.  

So, in order to make all this happen, teachers must first be trained in the conceptual frameworks of designing, facilitating, and directing an online course. Such training should include imparting technological pedagogical content knowledge and knowledge of substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefinition models.  They must also be trained in how to meaningfully engage students in an online class and support the learning needs of diverse student population. 

True, what is now possible in the virtual world with the kind of technological advancement that we are witnessing today would not have been possible even a few years ago. But to leverage on this what is called for is: steadfast commitment from the teaching community to make online teaching effective.  This simply mean: tremendous hard work from the deliverers of learning. For, they have to consciously move away from their today’s style of teaching—a style dominated by delivering content-driven packages in a locked-in atmosphere—to participatory knowledge-building style. Would they? The answer is anybody’s guess!

Nevertheless, the COVID-19 induced prospect of hundreds of schools, their teachers and students venturing into cyberspace for the first time having gone up tremendously, one wonders if schools and their faculty jump into the bandwagon without proper training to translate their teaching expertise into a different learning modality, and without addressing other infrastructural issues,  a very different outcome seems as likely. And it may not be in anybody’s interest!

బోధనే ఓ ఆలాపనగా...

సోక్రటీస్ దృష్టిలో బోధన మంత్రసానితనం లాంటిది. ఎలా అయితే మంత్రసాని తన చేతినైపుణ్యంతో గర్భిణీస్త్రీకి ఈలోకానికి కొత్తప్రాణిని ప్రసాదించటానికి సహకరిస్తుందో, అదే రీతిలో ఉపాధ్యాయుడు తన బోధనానైపుణ్యంతో విద్యార్థి మనస్సు కొత్త ఆలోచనలను, జ్ఞానాన్ని వాటి అర్ధాన్ని అంది పుచ్చుకోవటానికి సహకరిస్తాడు.

అర్థాత్, ఏ ఉపాధ్యాయుడూ జ్ఞానాన్ని జడత్వంగా వున్న విద్యార్థి మనస్సులోకి జొప్పించజాలడు; విద్యార్థే ఉపాధ్యాయుడు సహకారంతో జ్ఞానాన్ని కనుగొంటూ క్రమేణా తనసొంతం చేసుకుంటాడు.

సోక్రటీస్ ప్రశిష్యుల్లో ఒకరైన అరిస్టాటిల్ ఉపాధ్యాయ వృత్తికి తన నిర్వచనాల ద్వారా ఇంకొంచెం స్పష్టత కల్పించాడు. బోధన, వ్యవసాయంలాగా ఒక సహకారాత్మకమైన కళ. ఎలా అయితే మొక్కలు రైతు సహాయం లేకుండా కూడా మొలిచి, పెద్దవై, పూలు, కాయలు ఇస్తాయో, అలాగే మనం కూడా ఎన్నో విషయాలు మనంతట మనంగా తెలుసుకోగలం. కానీ అవే మొక్కలు రైతుపోషణలో ఏపుగా పెరిగి, అధిక ఫలసాయం అందిస్తాయి. అలాగే ఉపాధ్యాయుని బోధనలో విద్యార్థి జ్ఞానాన్ని సులువుగా, ప్రభావవంతంగా, సాధికారికంగా సొంతం చేసుకోగలుగుతాడు.

బోధన రెండు మనస్సులకు సంబంధించినది. ఉపాధ్యాయుడు మాట్లాడే యంత్రం కాదు. అతను ఎవరో అజ్ఞాతంలో వున్న వ్యక్తికి తన పాఠాన్ని ప్రసారం చెయ్యడు. తన బోధనను సంభాషణలతో సాగిస్తాడు. ఇది రెండు వైపులనుంచీ జరుగుతుంది. ఇలా ఉపాధ్యాయుడు - విద్యార్థి మధ్య సాగే సంభాషణ చేతనాచేతన స్థితికి అతీతంగా జరుగుతూంటుంది. దృఢమైన, స్నేహపూర్వకమైన సంబంధమున్న గురుశిష్యుల మధ్య ఎక్కువశాతం జ్ఞానప్రసరణ ఇలాగే సాగుతుంది.

బోధన అనేది రెండువైపులనుంచీ సాగే ప్రక్రియ. గురువు దీక్షనిస్తాడు. విద్యార్థి స్వీకరిస్తాడు. అలా అని విద్యార్థి తనను తాను గురువుకు బందీని చేసుకోడు. పిల్లలు తల్లిదండ్రుల సహాయ, సహకారాలతో ఎలా అయితే ఎదుగుతారో, అలాగే విద్యార్థులు గురువు సహకారంతో జ్ఞానవంతులుగా ఎదుగుతారు.

"నిజం అనేది ఏమిటి? దానినెలా గ్రహించటం? దాని విలువ కట్టటమెలా? అది ఔనో కాదో అని నిర్థారించుకోటం ఎలా?" అన్న ప్రశ్నలకు ఉపాధ్యాయుడు విద్యార్థికి సమాధానాలు వెతుక్కునే దారి చూపిస్తాడు.

అంతేకాని, "ఇదీ సిద్ధాంతం", "ఇది ఇంతే", "దీన్ని వల్లె వేసుకో ... పదిసార్లు చదివి గుర్తు పెట్టుకో అని విద్యార్థి ఎదుగుదలకోరే ఉపాధ్యాయుడెవరూ చెప్పడు. తన వృత్తి ఎరిగిన ఉపాధ్యాయుడు విద్యార్ధికి ఆలోచించే విధానం, ఆలోచన ద్వారా కొత్త విషయాలు గ్రహించే పద్ధతి నేర్పుతాడు. తెలివైన విద్యార్థిలోని జిజ్ఞాసను, అతని వాదనలను, అలోచనలను గౌరవించి అందలి తప్పొప్పుల గురించి విశ్లేషణాత్మకంగా విశదీకరించి, విద్యార్థిని సన్మార్గంలో ఎదగటానికి ప్రోత్సహిస్తాడు.

అప్పుడే బోధన అనే ప్రక్రియ, అరిస్టాటిల్ అన్నట్లు సహకారాత్మకమైన కళగా వెలుగొందగలదు. అప్పుడే ఈ కళ విద్యార్థులను తమనుతాము జ్ఞానవంతులుగా తీర్చిదిద్దుకోగల సమర్థులుగా చేస్తుంది. ఈ భావమెరిగిన ఉపాధ్యాయుడు దీనినొక ఉదాత్తమైన కళగా ఆచరిస్తాడు, ఆదరిస్తాడు. అప్పుడే అతని వృత్తి సమాజానికి ఉపయోగపడగలదు.

బోధన: రకరకాలు?

రాధిక తన చిన్నకొడుకు, బస్సు దిగి కాళ్ళీడ్చుకుంటూ వచ్చి, బ్యాక్ ప్యాక్ డైనింగ్ టేబుల్ మీద పడేస్తుంటే, కిచెన్ లో నుంచే అడిగింది: ‘ఏమ్మా ఎలా ఉంది స్కూల్లో ఫస్టుడే?’ వూఁ … ! హాఁ … !” "ఏంటి? నసుగుతున్నావ్? బాలేదా?" "స్కూల్ బానే వుంది. ఆఁ ..." "మరేంటి?" నీరసంగా నవ్వుతూ... " ఆఁ ... మిస్ ఎవరో... బోర్డు దగ్గర... మాట్లాడుతూనే ఉంది … రోజంతా" అని గొణిగాడు.

                                               

బోధన: రకరకాలు?

మొదటిరోజు స్కూల్లోనుంచి, “మమ్మీ! మమ్మీ…!” అంటూ పెద్దగా నవ్వుతూ పరిగెత్తుకొ చ్చాడు వాళ్ళ అయిదేళ్ళ రౌడీవెధవ మాలతి దగ్గరకు. మెల్లగా… పడిపోతావురా వెధవా!” అంటూ మాలతి ముందుకు పరుగెత్తుతుంది. మమ్మీ! మమ్మీ!” మంచి హుషారుగా ఉన్నావ్! ఏమైంది క్లాసులో?” మిస్!... మిస్!” ఆఁ… మిస్! ఏమైంది వొక టిచ్చిందా!” హుషారుగా క ళ్లు ఇంతవిచేసి, చేతులూపుతూ, నోరంతా తె రిచి, “నేను… రేపుకూడా క్లాస్ కి రావాలంట!” అంటూ ఎగిరి మమ్మీని వాటేసుకున్నాడు.

John B Goodenough: Nobel at the age of 97

The father of lithium batteries, John Goodenough, who has been awarded Nobel Prize in Chemistry for 2019 along with two others is still very active in research at the age of 97.  

John Goodenough of the University of Texas at Austin won Nobel Prize in Chemistry for 2019 along with two others—Stanley Whittingham of Binghamton University, New York and Akira Yoshinoof Meijo University—for his work on rechargeable lithium-ion  battery that today powers everything from cell phones to laptops and electric vehicles.

Goodenough, aged 97, is the oldest ever winner of a Nobel Prize. It was in the ’80s that Prof. Goodenough, who, on moving to Oxford from the US as professor, picked up the work that Prof. Whittingham carried out to develop lithium batteries as a scientist at Exxon in the US in the early 1970s but discontinued the same in the early ’80s as the oil company cut back its expenditure on research.  

Prof. Goodenough, predicting that a cathode made of metal oxide than a sulphide would have greater potential, had improved the battery’s performance by introducing new materials—cobalt oxide— for its electrodes. The Nobel committee has considered this has a “decisive step towards the wireless revolution”.

Prof. Akira Yoshinoof and his colleagues at Asahi Kasei, the Japanese chemicals company, picking up Goodenough’s cathode as a basis and using petroleum coke—a carbon material—in the anode, developed the first commercially viable lithium-ion battery in 1985. 

Thus came into market a lightweight hardwearing battery that could be charged hundreds of times before its performance deteriorated. Their introduction in 1991 had revolutionized our lives. To quote Akira, “the way [these] batteries store electricity makes them very suitable for a sustainable society.”

So, rewarding such a work with a fitting prize is, no doubt, a good news. But to my mind, what struck as a real big news is: Prof. Goodenough is actively pursuing his research interests—“studying relationships between the chemical, structural and electrical properties of solids, addressing fundamental solid-state problems in order to design new materials that can enable an engineering function”—as Virginia H. Cockrell Chair in Engineering at The University of Texas at Austin, USA, at the age of 97 and even publishing research papers. 

This 97-year-old professor, believing that “We have to … make a transition from our dependence on fossil fuels to a dependence on clean energy” and saying, “So that’s what I’m currently trying to do before I die”, comes to his lab every morning before 8 a.m. and with a small flock of graduate students and postdoctoral researchers works on designing a new battery to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.

In line with this ambition, he along with a colleague, Maria H Barga, a senior research fellow, published a paper in Energy & Environmental Science in December 2016 about a glass battery—a type of solid state battery with a glass electrolyte and lithium or sodium metal electrodes, that indeed generated controversies, because they have also claimed that its storage capacity increases with age. 

Controversies because: thermodynamics perhaps maintains that a battery only deteriorates over many charge-discharge cycles. Of course, Goodenough and Barga have an explanation for the controversy raised. According to them, their glass electrolyte is of ferroelectric material. Its polarization switches back and forth in the presence of an outside field.  As a result, the charge-discharge cycles are indeed jiggling the electrolyte back and forth and over a period, this is perhaps leading to emergence of an ideal configuration of each electromagnetic dipole. 

Controversies apart, what is worth noting here is the active engagement of Prof. Goodenough in research even at the age of 97 and his craving to develop and offer a product that is good for the world. His desire to do good for the society well echoes in his comments on science and its utility, which indeed merits everyone’s attention: “Technology is morally neutral—you can use it for good and for evil. You can use it to explode bombs under somebody’s vehicle. You can use it to steal a bank account. As scientists, we do the best we can to provide something for society. But if society cannot make the moral decisions that are necessary, they only use it to destroy themselves.”  

Above all, there is another statement that he made after receiving the Nobel Prize that calls for our deep reflection: “They don’t make you retire at the University of Texas at a certain age, so I’ve had an extra 33 years and I’m still working every day.”

This makes me wonder, why our Universities are not encouraging such possibilities in our campuses. …. Secondly, whatever little of such possibilities that we hear from here and there, say for instance one such facility offered to retired professors by JNU, they are all steeped in murky controversies. Now the disturbing question that a layman on street on listening such episodes from abroad faces is: Are we not capable of cultivating and nursing such a healthy work culture in our universities?

Challenges posed by Shadow Education

Education, according to Adam Smith, is a social process. In his opinion, education is central to a flourishing society. For, educated people are “less liable … to the delusions of enthusiasm and superstition” and “less apt to be misled.”  It is perhaps in the light of this belief that he favoured education for all.  Indeed he argued in his The Wealth of Nations for the government to provide public education for everyone for it simply benefits the economy by offering more educated workers. 

Today, education has become the lynchpin of economic and social development. It is viewed as the most effective means to eradicate poverty. It even counters the widening inequality in the society by promoting employment, improved-earnings and health across the social classes. All this cumulatively leads to social cohesion. Of course, there is a great ‘if’ behind all these averments: if only education is accessible to everyone.

With the passing of RTE Act, our government thought that it had addressed this issue squarely, for it offered a framework for making education available to children freely, at least for eight years, across the nation. No doubt, the spending on schools rose by about 80% in 2011-15. The literacy rate has also risen from 52% in 1991 to 74% in 2011. Midday meal programme is said to have helped children go to school regularly.

That said, it must also be noted that the education in the government run schools remained a big disgrace. A survey conducted by National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA) makes certain disturbing revelations: 42,000 schools that are run by the government in the country have no buildings; 26% of the schools are run in rented buildings; 10% of the schools, i.e., more than 100,000 schools, are run in single-room structures. Among them, 90% are located in rural India. About 81,000 schools do not have even blackboards.

Besides the lack of physical infrastructure what is more disturbing is: quality of education that these schools offer. Sometime back, Economist observed that “half of its [our] nine-year-olds cannot do a sum as simple as eight plus nine. Half of ten-year-old Indians cannot read a paragraph meant for seven-year-olds.” Much of this is, obviously, owing to poor competency, or the ethical standards of the teachers manning these schools. Secondly, the automatic promotion of pupils from one class to the other has made the job of teachers that easier: they need not ensure that their pupil understood the lessons that they were supposed to teach. Ironically, within the government schools, there is a wide gap in the quality of education offered by Kendriya Vidyalayas and schools run by municipalities and by Panchayats in villages. Which means, nothing much has changed on our educational front!

Amidst this disturbing scenario of our education system, the recently launched economic reforms had only heightened the need for ‘efficient’ work-force. For, efficiency alone can lead to growth in a highly competitive markets. Which means that it is only when individuals maximize their own selfish utility that the resulting competitive equilibrium can become Pareto-optimality. In this emerging milieu a certain class of parents picked up ‘outward orientation’ strategy as a means to get their wards fit for survival in the ‘knowledge economy’. For them education is no longer simply going to school. They realized that to prosper in a rapidly changing economic scenario, their wards need more than basic literacy—they need skills to think, to be problem-solvers and to be innovative and creative as they advance in life.

As a result, the high school students are today facing considerable pressure in acquiring necessary competency to write competitive examinations to gain admission to elite colleges/institutes of higher learning such as IITs, IIMs, NITs/desirable university courses, etc. Even after acquiring the requisite skills to succeed in competitive examinations, students need to further work on building up necessary skills to eventually graduate from the colleges and be ready to face the challenges of real world. It is needless to add here that it is only those with consistent good performance in the education that secure well-remunerated employment. As against this, those who perform poorly will end up with very limited economic prospects for the rest of the life.

The net result of these pressing demands is: anxious students and worried parents. To come out of this predicament, parents, who could afford, have turned towards supplementary tutoring, which is widely known as shadow education. In the recent past, shadow education has become more dense and widespread worldwide. For, it helps slow learners to catch up with their peers, while the high achievers are enabled to reach new heights. It indeed promotes personal academic development. Its contribution to human capital is, of course, substantial.

As a result, today, for thousands of children, schooling is not ending with the evening’s long bell. They are indeed straight going from there to some kind of private tutoring. Sometimes, they may undergo such tutoring within the same compound. It is also not uncommon for the government school teachers, who are incidentally, known to be indifferent to their students in the schools, offering private tutoring, that too, quite effectively, in the same school compound or at their residences or in private establishments. And students undergoing such private tutoring don’t have the luxury of weekends even.

In spite of such tight processes, all that these institutions could accomplish is: make the students cram the facts. And make them practice answering model question papers rightly and faster, perhaps. And the net result is: students do succeed in getting admission in their choicest institutes but at the cost of their ‘creativity’.

And surprisingly, such private tutoring appears to have penetrated even post-graduate courses. To my utter surprise, I came across a study carried out by Dr Anshu Sarna about shadow learning prevailing in Business schools around our capital city. Interpreting the survey data using statistical tools such as descriptive statistics, hypothesis testing, ANOVA and cluster analysis, she inferred that a student’s performance in maths in school studies had influenced the student’s decision to go for shadow learning. Intriguingly, the findings of this study throw open a plethora of questions, of which the important one being: What would be the behaviour of such tutored B-school students as tomorrow’s managers? Will they continue to look for coaching from others for taking decisions? Or, will they become independent in their handling the managerial roles? Only future research will reveal!

Reverting to our main focus, it must be said that private tutoring has indeed become an enterprise by itself even in our country. A study carried out by the Pratichi Trust in 2001/02 and 2009 established by Amartya Sen revealed that the proportion of children relying on private tuition has gone up from 24% to 58% in West Bengal, but what is more alarming is: the general conviction among the parents (78%) that private tuition is “unavoidable” if it can be afforded. Shadow education appears to be more prevalent in urban centers than in rural side. And, unsurprisingly, it is the educated parents who are more opting for such private tutoring for their wards.

Shadow education, though an all-pervading phenomenon across the globe, is causing great distress to Indian parents by demanding considerable financial investment. This demand for additional investment is, unfortunately, often found to result in boys walking away with private tutoring at the cost of girl students.

No doubt, shadow education has the potential to deliver desirable results but it also has a flip side: shadow education has the potential to divide student population into haves and have-nots and thereby undermines the very potential of education as a tool to lessen the inequality in the society.

This phenomenon, obviously, warns us that our public education system needs immediate correction, else it may distort the societal dynamics.

Pursuit of Science and Education: Which Way?

With the advent of liberalization and globalization of our economy, we have witnessed an astounding economic growth during the last decade of 20^th century and indeed continued to grow at a reasonable pace since then. Our economy is ranked third in the world in terms of purchasing power. Yet, this impressive economic growth could not push scientific research forward. Ironically, it continues to lag behind. The oft cited reason for such poor growth in scientific research is: our low level of investment in research—0.9% of GDP as against China’s 1.5% and 2.6% of the US. A dispassionate look at the whole issue however reveals many structural/systemic weaknesses too that stand in the way of our progress under science and its exploration.

Against this backdrop, it is pretty encouraging to read the interview given by the newly appointed Principal Scientific Adviser to the Government of India, K Vijaya Raghavan, a developmental biologist, to The Hindu (22-4-18). True to his image—a forthcoming scientist in discussions on ‘Science Policy’—he made certain interesting observations that merit the attention of all those who are concerned about nurturing scientific excellence in our country.

First things first: In order to expand the footprint of scientific excellence, Dr Raghavan wanted that the scientific institutions in the country must learn to “work together a lot more.” Of course, this has been agitating the minds of our scientific community for long: sophisticated equipment lying idle at one centre, while scientists from other laboratories lamenting at the lack of such/requisite equipment to carry forward their explorations. Secondly, the very style of carrying out research today is quite different from what it was in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries: individual inventor has been replaced by organized scientific research, which has even acquired international character. This approach has of course, amplified production of new scientific knowledge greatly. And with the advent of computers and novel modes of communication, growth and dissemination of new scientific knowledge has further been speeded up. With the result, people are being served by the industry with newer products and comforts at a faster rate than in the past.

However, science-based industries such as pharma and biotechnology, unlike matured sectors like semiconductor industry, are still look to universities/national laboratories for new scientific inputs. In such an evolving scenario, elite institutions of India could no longer afford to function in isolation but must pursue science in active collaboration with each other. It hardly needs to be stressed here that by pooling the know-how and resources across the institutional boundaries we can create better knowledge-base, can solve problems faced by the nation more creatively, improve productivity and pocket higher profits.

That said, it must also be admitted that it is not easy for such collaboration to materialize overnight across laboratories, for the leaders will be reluctant to cede their control over institutions/projects and relationships thereof, that too, having worked for ages in silos. Secondly, you know how difficult it is for adults to learn new ways of doing work merely by listening or reading circulars. So, the real question would be: how to transform the culture of our individual-driven labs into that of collaborative culture? How to make our subject specialists who built careers over their niche expertise to collaborate with their competitors? And yet, there is no way out: their expertise must be integrated across fields to offer better solutions to the society.

So, the policy makers/top leaders must invest one-on-one time with the experts/leaders supposed to implement the strategy to make collaboration happen as also support them with requisite training and coaching. Multiple meetings with the heads of labs is a must to make them imbibe the spirit of collaboration and model their behaviour towards it. People like Dr Raghavan must engage themselves in ‘story-telling’ about the success achieved, however small it might be, in centres elsewhere and how it could be made possible in every lab. Such stories/successes must be accessible to everyone, for it could act as a catalyst in making them think over the collaborative behaviour and in course of time own it. Till such time all that the scientific adviser talked about would remain as a mere wish.

The next comment that he has made from the perspective of student community is more important: “A student joining the National Institute of Immunology in New Delhi as an immunologist should be able to go to the neighbouring plant genome centre, and say, ‘I am very excited by plants. Can I switch from being an immunologist to being a plant biologist?’” As he rightly observes, today, it is near impossible for such a shift.

Perhaps, it is time for us to dismantle such rigid silos and make education available across the disciplines sans pre-set boundaries. And the earlier the better, for the wave of ‘disruption’ being heralded by the destructive innovation wrought by new technologies is feared to set free many from their present jobs in large-scale manufacturing industries, service industries and other private sectors. And they would be needing high quality university-level education that prepares them for reemployment in the realm of 21st century technology.

In the gig economy, even the fresh students entering the job-market are required to be equipped with knowledge of various disciplines, all fused into one. In such an evolving scenario, even the faculty need to reorient themselves: their teaching and research activities, particularly of those who are engaged in high-end technologies, must be made available to even students and research scholars from other institutions.

His third observation is about making “science accessible to citizens in the language they are comfortable with”, for, he felt “Science education … in English is exclusionary.” There are no two opinions about the validity of this statement. But it has tremendous capital costs, for as Raghavan himself observed, its accomplishment “will need investments in quality people who can write and translate texts in multiple languages.” Now the big question is: whether to allocate capital for the pursuit of scientific research in frontier areas that results in new knowledge or to invest capital in translating existing scientific knowledge into our regional languages. The importance of this question can better be appreciated if it is juxtaposed with our current level of investment in R&D, which according to the latest Economic Survey stood at 0.7% of GDP which is pretty low in comparison to an international scale.

Incidentally, such a translation project was once launched in the past but appears to have been abandoned half the way for obvious reasons. It is n order here, to say that universities and institutions of higher learning are already facing acute shortage of qualified staff even to carry out routine research and teaching. That being the reality, one can well visualise about the availability of competent translators to undertake the project of making science available in regional languages. A dispassionate look at this whole issue makes one wonder: Isn’t science education, be it in any language, ‘exclusionary’! After all mere access to science by itself does not make one a Chandrasekhar or Raman. And Ramans and Chandrasekharans will somehow acquire access to science, for they have a strong ‘why’ of their own. But what they certainly need is sustained support from the nation in terms of capital and laboratory facilities to keep their engagement with science going on fruitfully.

Populist measures sound pretty appealing, but their blind pursuit may leave us way behind the rest of the nations. And examples of such populist pursuits of the past making us miss the bus are many: Under the pretext of self-reliance, we invested earlier considerable sums in ‘reinventing the wheel’—establishment of CERI in Bits, Pilani to reinvent TV tubes in the 60s, etc—while countries like Japan and other Southeast Asian nations marched ahead by borrowing the existing technology from the west and once having acquired a foothold, kept themselves in the race by building newer technologies over it.

So, we have to make a choice, a choice that is rational but not populist and importantly capable of keeping the nation at par in its scientific endeavours with the rest of the globe, if not ahead of them. And this calls for leaders like Dr Homi Bhabha, who passionately worked for creating effective schools to undertake fundamental research across the disciplines. In this endeavour, we can even invite diaspora settled in the US universities to visit as adjunct faculties and guide young scientists in acquiring investigative skills.

Any endeavour that breaks away from the past is all set to encounter obstacles. Nevertheless, let’s hope for the success of Dr Vijaya Raghavan’s mission.