Nalini Taneja

IN a major development in the field of education, the education ministers of nine non-BJP states came together at a National Convention against Saffronisation of Education to sign a statement (see box), calling for withdrawal of the ‘National Curriculum Framework’ put forward by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) at the BJP government’s behest. It was the culmination of deliberations lasting for three days at the Constitution Club in New Delhi, organised by the Safdar Hashmi Memorial Trust (SAHMAT), on August 4-6.

August 4, the opening day, saw a massive response to the issue in the form of more than 600 participants from more than a hundred cities and towns. Participants included eminent academicians, educationists, teachers, research scholars, cultural professionals, journalists and activists.

Professor Prabhat Patnaik, who chaired the morning session on the first day, set the tone when he said that the convention’s objective was to "put an end to the attacks on rational discourse." He pointed out how the present government has converted almost every national level educational and academic body into an instrument for implementing the communal agenda of the Sangh Parivar.

Eminent historian and former chairman of the Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR), Professor Irfan Habib elaborated on this theme when he said that distortion of history is crucial for the making of an "irrational discourse." What is being dished out by the Sangh Parivar in the name of history, through its textbooks and the ‘research’ of its ideologues, does not fulfil even the minimum criteria of verified facts for their assertions. There is a concerted attempt to deny the composite cultural heritage of the Indian people, and the deliberate obliteration of the contributions of the Dalits, the Dravidians and the tribes in the making of Indian culture. The political campaign of the Sangh Parivar cannot succeed without legitimising the Aryan origin of Indian culture and privileging Sanskrit over other languages, which accounts for the serious effort by the Sangh Parivar to invent its own version of history. It is not merely a distorted history, but pure invention that is being propagated, he pointed out. "The imaginary claims of Sangh Parivar historians about the Aryan civilisation, and that homo sapiens originated in the upper reaches of the Saraswati river, brings them close to the Nazi ethnocentric ideology," he said.

Professor K N Panikkar, vice chancellor of Sri Sankaracharya University, outlined how the changes being brought about in the education system are being "engineered by a government committed more to its ideological needs and the entrepreneurial interests of the ruling classes than to the requirements of society." He also pointed out the close collaboration and dependence between the forces of communalisation and the architects of globalisation. On the one hand, the very discipline of history is being marginalised and there is a concerted attack on the cultural diversity that is intrinsically linked with our social structure. Simultaneously, globalisation policies in education are geared towards marginalising this diversity and hierarchising culture to suit the designs of the Sangh Parivar.

Teesta Setalvad, editor of Communalism Combat, launched a spirited attack on the saffron agenda. She spoke of the numerous instances of distortions and crude communal interventions in school curricula and textbooks, especially in the states of Gujarat and Maharashtra. She gave numerous instances of practices in MCD schools through which students belonging to the minority communities are being terrorised, and the pretexts on which Christian schools are being targeted.

In the afternoon session on the day, Professor C T Kurien (chairman, Madras Institute of Development Studies) argued that the communalisation of education is a direct threat to the democratic functioning of educational institutions. A G Noorani, well known jurist and columnist, called upon the organisers to bring out a White Book detailing the RSS takeover of various institutions since the BJP government came to power.

Human rights activist and secretary of the All India Christian Council, John Dayal drew the delegates’ attention to the numerous attacks on Christian educational institutions.

Professor Roop Rekha Verma of Lucknow University defined her objections to the Sangh Parivar’s educational agenda as being not merely anti-minority but essentially anti-people. She listed several instances of how communal forces are infiltrating educational institutions in Uttar Pradesh, to the extent that there is not a single VC in the state today who does not have RSS affiliation. Kapila Vatsayan, formerly Academic Director of the Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts, stressed that diversity is the essence of Indian civilisation.

Deliberations on the second day focussed on the Hindutva brand of ‘science’ and the effects its introduction in the educational stream will have for the future of democratic India. Speaker after speaker underlined that the move to introduce the study of ‘Vedic astrology’ is an attack on the liberal, humane and rational values on which the university system of learning has been founded. Professor Satish Chandra, former UGC chairman, argued that it was a move planned over several years and finally implemented when the BJP-driven National Democratic Alliance came to power.

Fundamentalists hate science but love technology. It is to thwart scientific investigation and rigid interrogation of scientific precepts and inquiry within social sciences that the union HRD ministry, through the UGC, has introduced ‘Vedic astrology’ as a subject at the university level. So said T Jayaraman, scientist at the Mathematical Institute, Chennai.

While detailing the long history of attacks by the Sangh Parivar outfits on the spirit of free enquiry, Professor P M Bhargava emphasised how the values of equity, justice and secularism, epitomised in the Indian constitution, could only be propagated by a public school education system inspired by a really national school curriculum framework.

Professor Ram Punyani from IIT, Mumbai, detailed the implications of the sectarian agenda which is nothing short of an attempt to impose Hindutva. That, in turn, is hegemonist and anti-democratic in spirit.

The session saw great concern being expressed by teachers and educationists at the poison that is being injected into young minds through the Hindutva texts, and the newly revised social science texts in the BJP-ruled states. Discussions centred on the ‘National’ Curriculum Framework that the MHRD ministry is thrusting upon the nation, without discussion in the proper forums and without consulting the state governments. Given that school education is a state subject, it was underlined that this was a major and deliberate attempt by the government to scuttle any opposition to its educational agenda. The contents of the document were discussed threadbare. Some speakers referred to the contents of the Vidya Bharati school texts, arguing that the ‘national’ curriculum had a strong inject of the Vidya Bharati project. It was stated that the hatred being perpetuated through education, especially the Vidya Bharati school texts, must stop.

Dr Vasanthi Devi, former vice chancellor of the M S University, Chennai, spoke of the attempts to distort and manipulate history as an integral part of the sectarian campaigns of the Sangh Parivar, and enjoined that the battle against communalisation must be combined with a war on caste. She also spoke of how, under the impact of globalisation policies, only market friendly courses were given priority, and there is hardly a school in Chennai which offers history at the plus two level. She laid stress on improved methods of pedagogy which must be child-centred if education is to have any real meaning for the child.

Professor Arjun Dev, former head of the Social Sciences Department in the NCERT, whose book is among those withdrawn by the present regime, gave details on how the National Framework document was pushed through, even without a proper discussion within the NCERT. He pointed out how the document was full of selective quotes from historians and posits religion as the only source of values. The emphasis on value education in the document essentially means religious education, with focus on Brahmanical religion. It is being implemented without national scrutiny by either the parliament or by the states. In the NCERT, books by Professors Romila Thapar, R S Sharma, Bipan Chandra and Satish Chandra are being shelved, and new texts are being prepared whose contents would be known only when they come out. Yet one knows what to expect, given that people close to the Sangh Parivar are predominant in all the relevant committees.

Professor Anil Sadgopal (Delhi University) analysed the National Framework document in the context of both the communalisation drive of the BJP government and the pronouncements on promotion of information technology being made off and on by government spokesmen and the HRD minister himself. He pointed to the inherent disparities the BJP’s education policy is likely to promote, and to the dichotomies inherent in a situation when the benefits of information technology are being offered to the elite, while the majority are left to make do with the revised social science texts that promote a selective, sectarian and Brahmanical value system.

Professor Farida Khan (Jawaharlal Nehru University) talked of the gender bias in the new curriculum framework. She also called for a strong protest against the document.

The final day of the convention saw the Chhattisgarh chief minister Ajit Jogi, education ministers of nine non-BJP states, members of parliament like Eduardo Faleiro, Bharati Ray and Shabana Azmi, and political leaders from several parties demanding the withdrawal of the ‘National’ Curriculum Framework. Sitaram Yechuri and Brinda Karat represented the CPI(M), and A B Bardhan spoke on behalf of the CPI. Arjun Singh (Congress-I) lent support to the convention on behalf of his party.

The session was chaired by eminent historian Professor Romila Thapar who concluded it by raising the problem of actually realising the principles of secularism in practice. Mere legislation is not enough, she said; there is the need to go into the nitty-gritties by looking into the textbooks, into what is being shown on TV and what is happening in schools and universities. She also emphasised that the new millennium has opened new avenues for knowledge; the need is to look forward to these possibilities rather than backwards to unconditionally glorify the past. The need is to find ways to make millions educated and not merely literate. The BJP government’s policies are diverting attention from the task of improving the present for the sake of a better life. She also pointed out how the new initiatives in education lack transparency, inhibit participation by those for whom education policies are being designed, and are geared to denying quality education to the Dalits, OBCs, women and other disadvantaged sections of society. She called for an interrogation and reversal of these trends. The non-BJP governments in the states and the leaders of secular parties have a greater responsibility in defending secularism and the cultural plurality of the country. The school system must reflect the diversity and pluralism inherent in Indian society, she said. She argued that the education system must more closely reflect the links between education and people’s aspirations, among many other things.

The convention concluded with the release of a statement characterising the ‘National’ Framework document as devoid of legitimacy and demanding its immediate withdrawal. It also demanded that the process of consulting states in matters of national education policy should be initiated; in fact no other document should be released till a national consensus is evolved through a discussion in the proper forums, and all the procedures adhered to which are necessary for the framing of a national policy on education.

The statement also placed on record the view of the non-BJP political parties that courses like Vedic astrology being introduced into the university system in the name of promoting traditional knowledge, are aimed at fostering revivalism and destroying the scientific academic character of our higher education. These must be immediately withdrawn.

The statement was a major development in that it is the first concerted effort by non-NDA governments to oppose the BJP’s policy of communalisation of education. It criticised the NDA partners for remaining silent spectators to the havoc being unleashed by the recent changes in education and the whole scale takeover of institutions by the BJP-affiliated outfits.