06-25-2009, 12:10 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The entire reservation debate is a pseudo one. Let me present two
dominant varieties of responses: (a) abolish reservations, and instead
help the students and either financially or not (b) every forward
caste should need reservations.
I am not supporting a claim that the incompetent should be given
admissions, jobs, etc.
The pertinent question is: how incompetence came into being?
Let me run through some answers.
(1) innatist variety: that some human beings are incomptent by birth;
that some others are 'smart' by birth. This is empirically false: it
takes 10 years for a kid to master his/her first language. Assume you
are some 25 years old, whose first language is telugu. It takes more
than 10 years to become like an American whose first language is
English: Probably, your uncle has lived in US for 30 years, and yet
has accent. Is the latter a counter instance? Definitely not. In the
case of a kid, the unlearning part is miniscule as compared to a
telugu speaker who has to unlearn many things but couldn't unlearn the
things he learnt.
(2) anecdotal evidence: slogans "man, my classmate was damn smart; he
could solve problems that many others couldn't solve". It is
undeniable that there is creativity. Creativity is there because human
s are situated in some or another context. Human thinking is a
situated and limited thinking. Whenever one transgresses such a
limited thinking, we call such a phenomenon creativity. But when
everyone adapts to such a creativity, it ceases being creative any
longer. Then, wait for another break through. In some context, you
could be creative; yet in another, your buddy could be. Then, one may
remonstrate that the difference between the guy who was creative at
some point, one hand, and other guys who weren't at that point is
tantamount to the difference between our proverbial SC candidate
having gotten 35/100, and a reddy guy with 99/100. But this retort
will loose its biting force if we reflect upon further.
In fact, we can compare any thing (say, dog) with any other thing
(say, yahoomail). In the reservation case, the learning situations
have to be compared. However, different people learn the same thing in
various ways: some find easy one particular way; yet you find that
particular way difficult. For instance, solving arithemetical problems
by reducing the latter into the problems of geometry, I would find
exciting; my friend gets annoyed with such a approach: yet, we both
solve the same problem. This calls for plurality of teaching methods,
and for various cognitive strategies.
But the current education system--be it Indian or American--is
bankrupt in this aspect: we don't have multiplicity of teaching the
same thing. Most important, many people just get through high school,
colleges by rote learning. Then these guys are confronted with many
problems in the college: for instance, when a physics professor
approximates some differential equation; these guys have 'forgotten'
the background knowledge (in fact, they didn't even learn the
background knowledge--if you learn something, it is hard to forget--,
despite their having passed SSC, PUC). This tragedy compounds year by
year: from the 1st grade one's graduation from some university.
Next, the very exams are bogus. The question-answering (problem
solving) exams are not the best indicators of the ability of critical
thinking. Posing questions/problems is as important as solving them.
In fact, the scientific research progresses by posing 'right'
questions, not by answering.
Why this long mail? Don't think that SC guy who got 20/100 marks in
some exam is stupid. He is as competent as you are; we should rather
blame the educators, and *burn alive* educational psychologists.
That's why SC/BC/ST gurukula-s have failed. This also explains sending
your kids to Narayana Residential college is not helpful: think of the
bad stories of the relatives who sent their kids to such schools.
In other words, financial incentives (gurukulas for the poor,
narayana/ratnam/koras for those who can afford) don't solve the deep
problems: only when we have plurality of teachings are these
narayanas, gurukulas of immense help.
Lastly, imagnine, if you will, a world in which farming is financially
better off than working in a sun, a microsoft, a google. Everyone of
us would turn to mastering techniques in farming: then, we will see
farming training centeres in SR Nagar. Also, then we will be bitching
about reservations, etc, when some learn well, some others not.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
dominant varieties of responses: (a) abolish reservations, and instead
help the students and either financially or not (b) every forward
caste should need reservations.
I am not supporting a claim that the incompetent should be given
admissions, jobs, etc.
The pertinent question is: how incompetence came into being?
Let me run through some answers.
(1) innatist variety: that some human beings are incomptent by birth;
that some others are 'smart' by birth. This is empirically false: it
takes 10 years for a kid to master his/her first language. Assume you
are some 25 years old, whose first language is telugu. It takes more
than 10 years to become like an American whose first language is
English: Probably, your uncle has lived in US for 30 years, and yet
has accent. Is the latter a counter instance? Definitely not. In the
case of a kid, the unlearning part is miniscule as compared to a
telugu speaker who has to unlearn many things but couldn't unlearn the
things he learnt.
(2) anecdotal evidence: slogans "man, my classmate was damn smart; he
could solve problems that many others couldn't solve". It is
undeniable that there is creativity. Creativity is there because human
s are situated in some or another context. Human thinking is a
situated and limited thinking. Whenever one transgresses such a
limited thinking, we call such a phenomenon creativity. But when
everyone adapts to such a creativity, it ceases being creative any
longer. Then, wait for another break through. In some context, you
could be creative; yet in another, your buddy could be. Then, one may
remonstrate that the difference between the guy who was creative at
some point, one hand, and other guys who weren't at that point is
tantamount to the difference between our proverbial SC candidate
having gotten 35/100, and a reddy guy with 99/100. But this retort
will loose its biting force if we reflect upon further.
In fact, we can compare any thing (say, dog) with any other thing
(say, yahoomail). In the reservation case, the learning situations
have to be compared. However, different people learn the same thing in
various ways: some find easy one particular way; yet you find that
particular way difficult. For instance, solving arithemetical problems
by reducing the latter into the problems of geometry, I would find
exciting; my friend gets annoyed with such a approach: yet, we both
solve the same problem. This calls for plurality of teaching methods,
and for various cognitive strategies.
But the current education system--be it Indian or American--is
bankrupt in this aspect: we don't have multiplicity of teaching the
same thing. Most important, many people just get through high school,
colleges by rote learning. Then these guys are confronted with many
problems in the college: for instance, when a physics professor
approximates some differential equation; these guys have 'forgotten'
the background knowledge (in fact, they didn't even learn the
background knowledge--if you learn something, it is hard to forget--,
despite their having passed SSC, PUC). This tragedy compounds year by
year: from the 1st grade one's graduation from some university.
Next, the very exams are bogus. The question-answering (problem
solving) exams are not the best indicators of the ability of critical
thinking. Posing questions/problems is as important as solving them.
In fact, the scientific research progresses by posing 'right'
questions, not by answering.
Why this long mail? Don't think that SC guy who got 20/100 marks in
some exam is stupid. He is as competent as you are; we should rather
blame the educators, and *burn alive* educational psychologists.
That's why SC/BC/ST gurukula-s have failed. This also explains sending
your kids to Narayana Residential college is not helpful: think of the
bad stories of the relatives who sent their kids to such schools.
In other words, financial incentives (gurukulas for the poor,
narayana/ratnam/koras for those who can afford) don't solve the deep
problems: only when we have plurality of teachings are these
narayanas, gurukulas of immense help.
Lastly, imagnine, if you will, a world in which farming is financially
better off than working in a sun, a microsoft, a google. Everyone of
us would turn to mastering techniques in farming: then, we will see
farming training centeres in SR Nagar. Also, then we will be bitching
about reservations, etc, when some learn well, some others not.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->