http://www.bismillahnews.in/?page_id=1640
SaveNonNETFellowship 7 Reasons why we need to reject the logic of "merit" for awarding scholarships — By Shehla RashidAISA activist and JNUSU vice president.
[Bismillahnews.in-25-10-15-New Delhi-Shehla Rashid] Friends, there are some news reports indicating that MHRD will continue to grant non-NET fellowships but on the basis of "merit". These statements are an attempt to divide students on the lines of "merit" and weaken the movement. It’s unfortunate that the govt bodies are communicating with us through newspapers. But we feel that it’s important to respond. Here’s why we need to reject this logic of "merit":
1. A government that thinks of RSS Membership as the only requirement for heading key institutions like FTII, ICHR, ICCR, etc. cannot be trusted to define what "merit" entails.
2. To say that those who do not qualify JRF are not meritorious is a laughable suggestion, as the NET-JRF exam itself is ridden with problems. First of all, it is biased in favor of students from Science background, as the Paper-1 consists of numerous questions pertaining to quantitative aptitude, computer science and pure mathematics. Second, we know that scholars with a critical approach to History find it difficult to crack the UGC NET exam, as the History paper is much below their standard. Thirdly, we have seen recently that the official answer key of UGC-NET Persian exam contained 94 wrong answers due to which no one in India cleared JRF in Persian. (It was after the intervention of concerned students across three country and a protest led by JNUSU-SLL&CS that this anomaly was corrected).
3. The students who gain admission to M Phil and PhD courses do so through a rigorous admission process. Once a student is admitted into M Phil and PhD, it means that they are eligible for research, and research cannot be undertaken without funding. If the government doesn’t fund research, private players, vested interests and social elites will control and steer the research agenda.
4. If, by merit, the UGC and MHRD want to imply that those who qualify NET exam will get non-NET fellowships, then it needs to be clarified to them that the NET exam is a test for teaching aptitude and not for research ability. To judge research ability, Universities already have an assessment process: M Phil and PhD aspirants compete on very limited seats and they also have to present a regular progress report signed by their supervisor in order to be able to avail the fellowship. One may be a specialist without necessarily qualifying an exam which is based hugely on general knowledge (Paper 1 of NET exam, especially).
5. The sword of logic has been used for centuries by the ruling classes to deny entry to those who have been deliberately excluded from the educational and cultural sphere. The oppressed castes, poor people, Dalits and women from marginalized sections have got the most to lose from this dangerous proposition. Often, what is thought of as "merit" is actually an assessment of English-speaking capacity, "personality" and communication skills. Upper-caste men in India have dominated knowledge production and access to learning. The recent trend of Sanskritization of educational and cultural institutions further favours these classes. With the steady privatization of education, students from poor families have to wage an enormous struggle to get good quality education. This has doubly affected Muslims and women. Given the grave inequalities that the Indian society is ridden with, aggravated by privatization and saffronisation of education, it is hypocritical on part of the government to use the stick of "merit" to browbeat marginalized sections. The democratization of the process of knowledge production is essential not just to enable all youths, irrespective of their background to pursue research, but also to ensure that the ‘ruling ideas’ dominating our course books and academic and socio-political discourses are not the ideas of just the monolithic majoritarian ruling establishment! For our knowledge systems to be contextual, sensitive to the specific problems confronting our society and nation and reflective of our plurality, the process of their production must necessarily be inclusive. Thus, the cost of research endeavour must be borne by the state from the funds that citizens pay as taxes.
6. The present BJP led government at the centre, deploys its favourite slogan – “#MakeInIndia” – with considerable fanfare to grant loan waivers and subsidies to giant corporate houses and to tamper with labour laws in order to ensure cheap and compliant labour for the extraction of super profits. It does not however think it at all necessary to recognize, or even acknowledge, the democratic process of knowledge production in India and by students in Indian universities! The government must realize that the number of years a student spends to pursue M.Phil. or Ph.D. are not just years spent in persuasion of a degree but years spent in the production knowledge.
7. For the development of the nation, it is important that young people are given opportunities to learn, grow and undertake good quality research. The nation cannot advance without its people. We know that the public spending on education is miniscule at the primary and secondary levels. It is ensured that only those who are already significantly privileged can even reach the University stage. It is possible that the score of students belonging to marginalized communities in the entrance examination may be lower than that of those hailing from more privileged backgrounds. However, the few students from marginalized sections who manage to reach the University level are, in that sense, much more meritorious than those who have reached this level on the basis of a significant advantage.To then deny them funds for research using the flawed logic of "merit", which could be based on their score in the entrance exam, for example, is an oppressive logic and will serve only to throw out these hardworking students from higher education.
We will reject any such proposal made by the UGC. We will reject any deviation from the original agenda. We stick to our demand of increasing fellowships from Rs. 5,000 to Rs. 8,000 for MPhil and from Rs. 8,000 to Rs. 12,000 for PhD scholars. We also demand that non-NET fellowships be extended to all universities, including state universities. We further call upon the Government of India to refrain from signing the impending WTO agreement to bring education under tradable services or face massive protests.
****************
No comments:
Post a Comment