Strengthening Values in Education

In ancient times, education considered the privilege of the priests and the ruling classes. The ability to read, writer and cipher ensured their dominance over the labouring classes and the peasants. The industrial revolution, and in particular the invention of the rotary printing press catalysed the downward dissemination of literacy.

Henry Steele Commager, said “Progress implacably requires change. Education is essential to change, for education creates both new wants and the ability to satisfy them.” The need to spread the ‘light’ of education to the great-unwashed as a ‘fundamental right’ is not unconnected with basic capitalism and the need to expand markets and create wants.

The ‘values’ transmitted to early students were essentially ruling class values. The art of warfare, diplomacy, knowledge of epics that invariably extolled the virtues of the priests and the warriors. The ‘Public School’ in England, and the “Private School’ in America existed to prepare a privileged ruling class. The Missionary Schools which mushroomed from the nineteenth to the mid-twentieth centuries , were basically vehicles to ‘teach the natives their rightful place in society’ which basically served to grease the wheels of colonialism.

Today , we have a Constitution that declares us all equal.
But the education curricula prepared for the so-called ‘non-formal’ centres or primary schools serving communities of Musahars, Chamars, Bhuiyans, and other marginal castes and tribes, shows an absence of respect for their values and customs.
How many lessons are drawn from their own reality, their folk-lore, their customs? Yet we talk of ‘mainstreaming’ the backward communities.

In our text-books, is there a single text which lauds the work of Dashrath Manjhi? How many passages are drawn from the writings of Dalit authors? How many passages laud the dignity of labour? In our Language papers, do we ever have our children write an essay on “One day as a brick-layer” or “The contribution of scavengers to the health of our city”?

Do we praise equality, but teach inequality? Mahatma Gandhi, the Father of the Nation, cleaned latrines. He broomed human excreta in an era where untouchability reigned supreme. He was upper caste and upper class. He taught equality and the dignity of labour by cleaning latrines. Gandhiji set an example in the teaching of values.

Let Parents and teachers live the values they teach. Global warming should be combined with a personal conservation of electricity. Can you teach cleanliness if you yourself throw garbage on to the street? Discipline should be taught by your own adherence to traffic rules, bank rules, standing in queues, waiting your turn.

Parents and teachers should live their values, educational values will automatically be strengthened.

THE OTHER SIDE OF CHILDHOOD

The Other Side of Childhood
Frank Krishner

Whenever we talk of vulnerable kids, we call to mind a picture of a slum-dweller, a rag picker or a street child sweeping second-class railway carriages for a few paise. Actually, children face violence everyday, and most of them are not on the street or in slums, but in our own beautiful middle class homes.

The scandal of violence against children is a horror story too often untold. With malice and clear intent, violence is used against the members of our society least able to protect themselves—children in school, in orphanages, on the street, in refugee camps, in detention, in fields and factories and at home.

In every region of the world, India included, children are subject to unconscionable violence, most often perpetrated by the very individuals charged with their safety and well-being.

Children are exposed to human rights abuses. Contrary to all our lip-service to abolishing child labour and implementing the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000, lakhs of Indian kids have no access to education, work long hours under hazardous conditions, are forced to become militants, or languish in orphanages or detention centres where they endure inhumane conditions and daily assaults on their dignity.


We made a promise 17 years ago

The year 2007 marks the seventeenth year of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child [CRC], the landmark treaty that guarantees children the right to be free from discrimination and arbitrary deprivation of liberty, to be protected in armed conflicts and torture or inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, to receive age-appropriate treatment in the justice system, and to be free from economic exploitation and other abuses, among other rights.

India was among the first countries to sign and ratify the convention [CRC]. Even though we have our economic and developmental constraints, thanks to committed activists who strongly advocated children’s rights issues, we have made some progress. But we have miles to go.

Do we take children seriously?

Abuses persist because children have few mechanisms for reporting violence and other human rights violations. Does your school have a grievance box where children can feel free to write their viewpoints, to disagree with how they are treated, and maybe to give suggestions? No? There you have it. The CRC clearly states that children have the right to be consulted on all matters that concern then, especially their development. No elected student council in your school clearly demonstrates that the genuine voices of your students are being stifled. The right to participate is being denied.

Schools are where the grossest of children’s rights violations take place. Corporal punishment [that means beating or whipping kids with rulers, sticks, canes, and even in one case reported to us by kids, thin electric wire that stings badly, but doesn’t leave marks] is still commonplace in schools. The teachers hold positions of power over the students. Instead of being benevolent guides and friends, many teachers are, to put it plainly, big bullies.

So what can the kids do in such situations? They may be reluctant to speak out for fear of reprisals. And because they are children, their complaints are often not taken seriously. Parents may be too busy, or they just may not want to take the trouble to meet the principal and register a complaint.

Even when children do make reports or abuse is exposed, perpetrators [usually the teacher] are rarely investigated or prosecuted. Those in a position to take action may be complicit in the abuse, reluctant to discipline or prosecute a colleague, or fearful of negative publicity. School principals are particularly shy of addressing this problem. At times, they may be actually afraid of the teacher! Other teachers who witness abuse by their own colleagues and attempt to report it may be dismissed for speaking up.

Rights-based education

The CRC which India is a signatory to and therefore must comply with clearly states that children [persons who have not attained the age of 18 years] have a right to an education, and primary education should be compulsory (required) and free. Secondary education should be available to everyone and governments should ensure that no one is excluded because of poverty.

Article 28 of the CRC lays down that discipline in schools should respect the child’s human dignity by following a spirit of understanding and tolerance and never causing physical or mental injury. Yet, how many times do teachers [ and even parents and caregivers] cause severe mental and psychological damage to children by inflicting verbal abuse and criticism meant to crush them, or give them a sense of low-self esteem?

Article 29 of the CRC says that education should develop a child’s personality, talents and abilities to the fullest. It should also encourage him or her to respect parents, human rights, the environment, and their own and other cultures. An Anglo-Indian child has an equal right to know about his culture through the school system as a Muslim child, a Nepali child, or a Buddhist child. If the school system is not supportive of the other sub-cultures within India or gives a distorted picture of the cultures of other lands or people, it’s in violation of the CRC.

Children have the right to learn and use the language and customs of their family, whether or not these are shared by the majority of the people in the country where he or she lives, according to article 30 of the CRC.

Last but not least, article 31 of the CRC says kids have a right to relaxation and play and to take part in cultural, artistic and leisure activities appropriate for their age. The Convention does not specify exactly what 'appropriate' activities might be for different age groups.

Education should be a joyful experience. Let’s help build a child-friendly environment in our schools by encouraging children to have their voices heard, and by taking them seriously. This is how we can avoid violence against children and abuse.


[Published TOI Patna, booklet] 2007
-------------

Constraints of the Media, with special reference to local and vernacular media units

Frank Krishner
[THIS PAPER WAS PRESENTED AT THE MADHYA BHARAT AREA 'MILITARY-MEDIA SEMINAR HELD ON 28 MARCH 2007]

The relationship between the Armed Forces and the Media has always been an uneasy one due to their contrasting needs.

The Armed Forces are always prone to secrecy while the media is generally trying to pry open secrets.

Yet, since the Second World War, there has been a worldwide realisation that these two institutions need to coexist to achieve the ultimate goals of the nation.

General Eisenhower wrote in 'Crusade in Europe’, "The commander in the field must never forget that it is his duty to cooperate with the heads of his government in the task of maintaining civilian morale that will be equal to every purpose. The main agency to accomplish this task is the press."


L N Subramanian, in an article “Media as force multiplier” wrote: “In India, we have a poor history of media relations. The Armed Forces closed themselves off and were content with the odd archaic newsreel on the forces. The most glaring example of this early on is the case of the 65 Indo Pak war, which even after a sound thrashing, the Pakistanis got themselves accolades by wining and dining the Western media. However, it is in the arena of internal security operations that poor media relations have really hurt the armed forces, the Government and the country at large.[1]

Constraints of the media

Let’s look at a few basics from the journalist’s point of view.

I cut my journalistic milk teeth in North Bengal, Sikkim, and Meghalaya during the troubled mid eighties and early nineties, and have had the opportunity of seeing reality through the eyes of the ‘small and medium’ newspaper establishment.

Perceptions: In border areas, where the security forces have to battle home-grown insurgency, relationships between the two establishments are at its best wary, and at its worst strained. The Army Jawan and his officer are often viewed as bullies, lacking sensitivity of local customs and respect for women. The army sees civilians and their institutions as tiresome, undisciplined and irritating. It cannot understand why the editors should give space to ‘the enemy’.

The media must be responsible, but to whom? The vernacular media is born of the soil; it reflects the aspirations of the people. The conflict is not black and white. There are shades of grey.

During CI-ops [counter-intelligence operations], the army finds itself in an unenviable position. Much of the troubles one sees are actually manufactured by civilians [the politicians], and over a period of time, when they get out of hand, then the army is called in. It is called upon to execute a job. Contain the insurgency. It expects that journalists support the efforts ‘wholeheartedly’ and ‘serve the nation’, and not wail over a few broken eggs.

Friction results when the local press is seen to be carrying stories and statements from rebels and other local leaders who may not want to toe the government line. It’s a question of perspective: civilians expect negotiated, long term solutions within the ambit of human rights. After all, they share their ethnicity, culture and space with the ‘rebels’.

As for the army, ‘most CI Ops are conducted at the Battalion and lower level and it is at this level that efficiency is understood solely by the body count or 'kills'. Here the broad aim of ending the insurgency gets translated to 'take no prisoners' and exterminating the 'Anti-national Elements' - terminology not without political significance.[2]

The army expects the press to ‘do its duty’ and pass on information to nab the ‘anti-national elements’.

The foot-soldier journalist is also in an unenviable position.

A credible journalist must maintain his links to the sources of information, and has to be trusted by them. He cannot be an ‘informer’. He has to be equidistant from the politicians, the police, the army and the insurgents and yet close enough to be trusted by them so as to get accurate and reliable news. Quite a tightrope performance!

There is also the factor of civilian – armed forces interaction. People living near the army camps sometimes come into conflict with the Jawans, be it over a goat, a brawl, or over the more serious charge of molestation and rape. Reporters trying to investigate will usually come up against a stone wall. The army has its own code, and brooks no interference from the civilian press. Statements are not prompt and forthcoming. Communication gap. The local press reports will portray the army as hostile and insensitive. The army will say that the local press is biased and unfair.

Constraints in power equations:

The vernacular media and the local press are often vulnerable to pressure and threats by militant groups. Local reporters are usually underpaid, existing on shoe-string budgets. Even for the town-based correspondent of a ‘national’ newspaper, it’s imperative that he survives to write his story. The local editor-cum-owner of a small newspaper cannot afford the luxury of having his press burnt down, or his paper boycotted for not publishing a press note by a militant group.

On the other hand, the editors of most local English language papers have cordial relations with the army and security forces. Vernacular papers may not share the same ‘status’ with the local army brass as English language papers.

Constraints of time: The press needs to deliver its news fast. It needs accurate, timely briefing. There are deadlines to be met. Stories cannot be kept on hold indefinitely while one waits for a response from the appropriate Army spokesperson.

The money factor: The press survives on revenue from advertisements. Vernacular and local papers often have no option but to survive on Government advertisements and political patronage. Not much of the budget is available for news-gathering. The main source of news is the wire-service. This is supplemented by the local press-release. The local editor actually needs press releases. Press releases cut down news gathering costs. An army press-release is usually carried.

Lack of expertise: Closely linked to the preceding point, not all media organisations can afford to have a designated reporter who is an ‘army expert’. Covering the military is a different ball-game. For example, not many reporters know what the armed forces do in their UN peace keeping assignments.

To the majority of the vernacular and local language reporters, ‘news’ means whatever they have been assigned to at the moment. Rapport building exercises by the army are largely regarded as a ‘jaunt’, and the expected payoff should be so many inches of column space and a few pictures.

The situation is fast improving with new recruits coming to the profession with degrees in journalism, and the availability of background material on the internet which is just a click away.

Lack of knowledge on military matters: The Civilian press needs to be trained in the technique for military reportage. I illustrate the point by directly quoting Subramanian:

The importance of the media in India’s first television war can be gauged by the fact the Kargil Committee report devoted a separate section to this issue. The report noted that while the coverage was satisfactory, it was apparent that the media lacked training in military matters and the Armed Forces lacked the training to facilitate the task of the media.

Since the MOD information cadre was not up to the task of handling the media, the briefing functions were taken up by a group of senior civil and military spokesmen.

Army HQ set up an Informational and Psychological Warfare Cell with direct access to the Army Chief to monitor and disseminate information in a calibrated manner. While this was in the capital there were no corresponding arrangements at the Corps, Division and Brigade levels. This resulted in wildly inaccurate and speculative reports of intruders capturing a number of Indian Army bunkers, building three storied bunkers with cable TV and buying cement from the Dras – Kargil market. (A similar characteristic observed in reports of the recent arms depot fire at Bharatpur)

The lack of knowledge about military matters resulted in umpteen reports questioning the absence of the army chief away in Poland as well as the Northern Army Commander away in Pune at the same time. These operations were limited to Corps level and were handled as such. [3]

The way ahead: Regular interaction between Army and the Press, along with a tendency towards openness on the part of the army, especially when civilians are involved or hurt or killed as part of the action.

The media should capitalize on the great news potential of the human interest story. The stories of the army men who lost their lives in counter-intelligence operations as newsworthy as those who die in war, but are rarely recognized as such.

The media should train its reporters and correspondents so that there is a better understanding of the working and constraints of the military. This, of course, can only be possible with Army cooperation.

On its part, the military must also examine and respond to such important ‘civilian’ concerns as Human Rights, regular and open briefing, and freedom of expression.


[1] L N Subramanian Article: Media as Force Multiplier Bharat Rakshak Monitor - Volume 2(6) May-June 2000
[2] Bikram Jeet Bhatia Article; A ‘general’ need for reform, May 2005, India Together {website]
[3] L N Subramanian Article: Media as Force Multiplier Bharat Rakshak Monitor - Volume 2(6) May-June 2000