|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
Editorial Distortion’s
long history purpose
For every single
ill afflicting our people, there is tendency to find the cause in the
prevalent state of illiteracy. The assumption is that education is a value
that will change things, everything, for the better. Yet, over the years, the
educated class in this country has become more intolerant and bigoted than
the previous generations. What is not being taken into account is that the
reasons for this xenophobia might lie in an increasingly
ideologically-driven education. Much has been written
about the recent incident of how two branches of a private school in Lahore
were put in the dock for their instruction of a subject by the name of
Comparative Religions and how the provincial government sprung into action
to confiscate the Science textbooks that aimed at imparting sex education to
girls of at least one branch of that school. But beyond the anger of
the alumni and the intellectual class at the response of the parents, a
section of media and the provincial government, there is a lot that needs to
be made a subject of debate. How the school handled the issue was seen as a
sort of submission to an unseen pressure group. While this was not the first
act of submission in this country, this certainly was a good time to start a
debate, for instance on why not sex education in schools. There’s another view
that the incident should wake up the school to how far it has moved from its
original progressive vision. If there is disconnect between the parent body
and the vision of the school, there definitely is something amiss. For all the flak the
school received for acting like any other mainstream private school, it did
decide to introduce a subject like Comparative Religions and exercised some
discretion in teaching the much required sex education, and deserves all
credit for this. As for the debate, it has
started already. There have been problems in our education policies,
curriculum, syllabi and text books. If we were in an ideal world where none
of these existed, there would still be the teachers with their old mindsets. We can only move ahead in
the face of these obstacles by going back — by looking again at the
purpose of education. Why exactly do we need to educate our children? That
should be the starting point for any discussion on education in this
country. If we manage to get some clarity there, the rest will be easy.
Lahore Grammar
School (LGS) — one of the best educational institutions in Pakistan —
recently took a bold initiative of introducing Comparative Religion as a
subject. In this subject, students were provided basic instruction in major
world religions that included Islam, Judaism, Christianity and Hinduism
among others. This change was largely welcomed, especially by students, who
reported a broadening of their intellectual horizons and strengthening of
inner spiritual bonds. But a few parents raised
objections to the teaching of the subject. The issue was taken up by the
host of a popular talk show and from there the news spread to social media
as well. Before things could take an uglier turn, the principal of the
school, Ms Nasreen Shah, issued a statement explaining the idea behind
introducing this subject. Despite such convincing
arguments steeped in religious sensibility and ethos, the issue snowballed
into a conspiracy. The Punjab government sprung into action by confiscating
the “objectionable” content and issuing a legal notice to the school
administration. This acerbic reaction is
reflective of a mindset and problems that arises from such a mindset. The
mindset epitomises Muslim exceptionalism. Although it has existed in South
Asia since the onset of the colonial rule, it became crystallised,
particularly among the urban middle classes of Pakistan during the last few
decades. At the outset, I would
like to make it clear that I am not suggesting a linear co-relation between
post-1857 developments and banning of a textbook in 2013 or that action
against LGS is a logical culmination of what originated in the nineteenth
century. I am simply trying to offer an explanation within a framework,
which suggests that ideas about Muslim exceptionalism developed among a
section of Muslim elites for political and economic reasons and that they
evolved during a period of time and took an extreme shape in the
post-colonial nation state of Pakistan and its urban middle classes through
a variety of processes. During the nineteenth
century, it started with a section of the Muslim ashraf who, after having
lost the political authority in the face of colonial takeover of India,
feared a decline in their status as the elite. When limited local
representation was introduced by the British, Sayyid Ahmad Khan was among
the first ones to raise an objection. In such a system, he argued, the
Muslims will always be disadvantaged because of their numbers. This should not be
understood as a general disrespect for the principles of democracy as such
(as some critics have done) but an aversion to the idea of majoritarian rule
without adequate safeguards for the minorities. The minority in this case
asked for special treatment. Its assertion was that, first, their numbers
were substantial in India. Even today, if put together, the Muslim
population in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh comes close to about 600
million. Second, this minority had
held privileged political position in India for a long period of time.
Muslim exceptionalism, as it developed from late nineteenth century onwards,
hence, argued that the Muslims should be given exceptional treatment because
of their numbers as a significant minority and the historical rule that made
them part of the ruling elite in the subcontinent. The Two Nation Theory is a
summation of Muslim exceptionalism. It conceives the Muslim community of the
South Asia as a monolith social entity, which has maintained certain
essential features and kept itself distinct from non-Muslim religious
communities by drawing sharply demarcated boundaries. Such a scheme of
things leaves no room for any understanding of history in which wider
civilisational dialogues and interaction took place between different
communities that were not essentially defined — or at least distinguished
— along religious lines alone. A natural corollary of
such understanding is an aversion to the idea of learning anything which
does not fall within the parameters of a Muslim identity and Islamic
religion defined and understood by Two Nation Theory. While one can argue
that such an attempt at defining limits — historical, political and
religious — served a rather ‘utilitarian’ purpose in united India as
it helped ensure cohesion of the Muslim community, its continuation in a
country where overwhelming majority of citizens are Muslim is perplexing. Or perhaps it was the
uniformity (which only appears to be a uniformity) of religion which, in the
first place, made the idea of any non-Islamic religion and learning about it
so repulsive (or just simply unnecessary) for the urban middle classes of
Pakistan. In united India, the
school textbooks had to incorporate sections to cover major religions or
religious figures of the region. Such a practice was no longer considered
necessary in Pakistan as the non-Muslim minority — especially after 1971
— was hardly of any significance. The mass exodus of Hindus and Sikhs from
Punjab, for example, meant that the first generation of young Pakistani grew
up in an environment devoid of religious cultural plurality that existed
before 1947. For the present day
generation of young Pakistanis, it will be impossible to conceive that not
so long ago 40 per cent population in the city of Lahore comprised of Hindus
and Sikhs. They had numerous religious sites and celebrated their religious
festivals — many of which were steeped in local cultural traditions —
with great fervour. For many ‘Muslim’
literati and academics who grew up in such a composite culture it was not
uncommon to have some understanding of Sanskrit and religious scriptures of
Hinduism and Sikhism. Such an exposure to other languages and religious
philosophies, in fact, broadened their vision and refined their artistic
craft. If one looks at the
greatest minds in arts and sciences who lived in Pakistan, one comes to the
conclusion that they all benefited from this exposure to composite culture.
This is found even in the writings of Ashfaq Ahmad who espoused a strong
idea of some kind of ‘spiritual nationalism’ for Pakistan. His famous
short story ‘Gadariya’ can be cited as an example. In his last novel
before death, ‘Khel Tamasha’, Ashfaq Ahmed drew upon dense philosophical
and spiritual debates within Hindu and Sikh traditions. But since the loss
of learning about this composite culture it is no wonder that Pakistan has
only managed to produce likes of Farhat Abbas Shah in poetry and Umaira
Ahmad in fiction. The rightwing media and
journalists are trying to justify the action against LGS on constitutional
grounds. They cite article 22(1) of the Constitution of Pakistan, which
stipulates that no citizen will be given religious instruction other than
that of his/her own religion. This particular section has been invoked in
the present case only. Pakistani textbooks teach
Islam in almost all subjects. One can find essays about Prophet Muhammad in
Urdu and English textbooks and Quranic verses in textbooks for physics,
biology and chemistry. So much so that textbooks for art and drawing also
teach religion. In her seminal work on
textbook controversies leading to sectarian violence in Gilgit-Baltistan,
Nosheen Ali refers to grade 7 textbook in which students were required to
sketch and colour calligraphic illustrations of the names of four pious
caliphs. No wonder that teaching of such textbooks has led to deepening of
sectarian strife and a tunnel vision of history, which is incapable of
looking beyond the confines of Islam, Muslim, and the Two Nation Theory. LGS, as envisioned by some
of its founding members, seeks to reverse this situation. Nasreen Shah, in
particular, has an astute understanding of history, religion, and culture.
That is the reason LGS is perhaps the only educational institution in the
entire country where Punjabi language is offered as a subject. The cultural shows of LGS
students include performances of classical South Asian dance, renditions of
mythical tales and singing of Amir Khusro’s poetry. This is because all of
this is considered an important part of the heritage and history of the
region, which presently comprises Pakistan. In similar vein, LGS introduced
the study of Comparative Religion. One can say that it is part of a larger
‘plan’ to educate students about a broader vision of history, culture
and religion, which goes beyond the narrow confines of Muslim exceptionalism
— an education which can truly live up to LGS’s motto of “education
enlightens heart and mind”. The writer taught at
Lahore Grammar School from 2002 to 2004
Critical
evaluation of the textbooks taught in educational institutions in Pakistan
during different phases of country’s history reveals that the selection of
content has had a lot to do with the ‘priorities’ of those in power.
Challenges faced by the state within its territory and beyond have also been
taken into account during the process. ‘Threats’ to the
‘ideological frontiers’ of the country have always haunted the
policymakers. They have given policy guidelines to curriculum developers to
‘protect’ these frontiers through content selection for textbooks. Unlike education systems
of the developed world, where students access multiple sources to prepare
their lessons, students in Pakistan follow the one-textbook approach. This makes students
vulnerable to long-lasting impacts of the content they read and the message
passed on to them through a particular content. The influence can be both
positive and negative, depending on the nature of the educational content in
textbooks. The conscious attempt at making educational content a tool to
achieve certain objectives has also compromised factual accuracy. Starting with the post
partition era, research scholars found that the educational content was free
from most biases at that time. Children were taught history of South Asia
and about Hindu leaders, such as Gandhi. In the 1950s, books from the
pre-partition era were taught in Pakistani schools. A study titled, “Subtle
Subversion,” compiled by A. H. Nayyar and Ahmed Salim states that despite
the bitter experiences of partition, “the early textbooks in Pakistan,
mostly written after the partition, were free of the pathological hate that
we see in textbooks today.” Citing examples, the
report says: 1) The early history books contained chapters on not only the
oldest civilisations of Moen Jo Daro, Harappa, Taxila, etc., but also the
early Hindu mythologies of Ramayana and Mahabharata and extensively covered,
often with admiration, the great Hindu kingdoms of the Mauryas and the
Guptas, 2) The books, indeed, showed biases when discussing the more recent
history of the politics of independence, but still one found school
textbooks with chapters on Gandhi, using words of respect for him and
admiring him for his qualities, 3) Even in the somewhat biased history of
politics of independence, the creation of Pakistan was reasoned on the
intransigence of the All India Congress and its leadership rather than on
‘Hindu machinations,’4) Some books also clearly mentioned that the most
prominent Islamic religious leaders were all bitterly opposed to the
creation of Pakistan. An expert on curriculum
analysis, Aamir Riaz, believes there are two major divisions in this regard.
First, he says, pertains to “the era from 1947 to 1965. During this
period, four reports on educational policy were produced, conferences were
held and commissions set up. This, Aamir says, was the time “when Indian
films were shown in Pakistani cinemas and, apparently, there was no threat
to country’s security and integrity. It all changed drastically
in 1969 — a phenomenon which, Aamir says, can aptly be called as parting
of ways. Following the 1965 war between Pakistan and India, relations
between the two countries deteriorated and there were conscious attempts to
glorify the armed forces in Pakistan,” he adds. Afterwards, educational
content was designed in such a manner that it would always portray
Pakistanis, the armed forces of the country, and its Muslim population as
the best in the region. There was even a proposal to close missionary
schools. Aamir says the same had
happened in India, which after the 1962 war with China, had centralised its
curriculum development policies and started focusing on Hindi. An Indian
writer, Krishan Kumar, wrote a book to explain this phenomenon. His point is
that it was the approach to rebuild a nation and its morale through a
purposefully designed curriculum that filled educational content with biases
of all sorts. A few attempts at
reforming the curriculum were made in the Ayub Khan era but the desired
results could not be achieved due to various reasons. “It was during this
period that the well-known Sharif Commission made valuable recommendations.
It is believed that the policy announced by the commission, which comprised
of seasoned educationists, is perhaps the best one. The three-year
graduation degree was also announced during this period, which led to the
launch of anti-Ayub movement by students. It was also in this era that
Pakistan Studies and Social Studies were introduced and there was hardly any
mention of India versus Pakistan in these books.” A major transformation in
Pakistani textbooks occurred during the 1970s, especially after the
country’s armed forces suffered defeats in East Pakistan. The curriculum
of this period is filled with mention of war heroes, sanctity of two-nation
theory, the wickedness of Hindus and Indians who engineered separation of
Pakistan, and so on. “It was in 1975 when different religious textbooks
were introduced for Sunni and Shia students. This was tantamount to
legalisation of sectarianism on the part of the state,” says Aamir,
adding, “It’s quite natural that regressive forces get strengthened
after a country is defeated in a war.” The most drastic changes
in curriculum were made during Ziaul Haq’s era who ensured
‘Islamisation’ of almost every sphere of life. Islamic studies were made
compulsory at all levels and students were made to read Arabic as well.
Besides, textbooks of Urdu, English, etc, also included chapters on Islamic
topics, which also had to be read and learnt by students belonging to other
religions. That was because Ziaul Haq,
in a bid to give a cover of legitimacy to his coup, tried to portray himself
as a saviour of the country. The extraordinary emphasis on the concept of
jihad in textbooks is attributed to the fact that the USSR army had invaded
Afghanistan by that time and the US was supporting Pakistan and the armed
groups to fight the invaders. An educational conference
was arranged in Zia’s time in which scientists discussed topics, such as
how to harness the energy of “jinns” to increase power production in the
country. Distortion of the
curriculum during this era is something which successive governments have
tried to undo, amid severe opposition from the forces of status quo. The PML-N
government does not seem interested in carrying out the exercise of
educational reforms.
The philistines
(Pakistan brand) have descended on Lahore’s educational institutions in
force. This is the result of a campaign instigated by a TV show host against
certain school courses and the provincial government’s panicky and
irrational surrender to bullying. One of the targets of the
self-chosen morality brigade is a chapter, ‘Reproduction in Humans’ in
the Cambridge Checkpoint Science Book II (for class seven) that is
prescribed in all schools preparing students for Cambridge University’
‘O’ and ‘A’ level examinations. A special committee of the Punjab
Education Department was hurriedly set up and it displayed indecent haste in
pronouncing its verdict on the subject of obscenity that sane heads will do
only after careful, cool-headed and extended deliberation. The committee condemned
the lesson under reference as “obscene material” and the provincial
government promptly banned the book and ordered its forfeiture. Obviously,
the authorities did not wish to follow the example of prudes in certain
school managements who used to tell the students that the impugned lesson
was not in their course or simply tore the relevant pages out off the book. A case can easily be made
out for basic sex education for school students, including girls. First,
boys and girls aspiring to take medical courses need to learn sex matters
quite early, preferably in schools. Secondly, girls should have good
understanding of sex in order to be able to protect themselves against
molestation, particularly in a society where rape of minor girls is common
and even five-year olds are not safe from predatory sex fiends. Thirdly, it
is better that children learn about sex from teachers in a controlled
environment rather than from internet and vulgar narratives in different
media and in situations of serious vulnerability. Yet, there may be some
room for debate on the propriety of introducing seventh grade students to
the reproductive process but none for the arbitrary and high-handed attitude
of the provincial authority. It seems it is obsessed with false notions of
moral propriety and has been unduly influenced by conservative elements’
calls for suppression of what they describe as obscenity and vulgarity.
These pseudo-puritans have long declared music, dance, theatre, TV drama,
painting, sculpture, et al, to be obscene. Any authority that yields to such
elements courts the risk of being forced to banish a large part of modern
and folk arts and culture from the lives of its people. These misgivings are
strengthened by reports that are received every now and then about
objections being raised to any scheme for offering sex education to girls. The other target of attack
is an innocuous course in comparative religion, designed to briefly
introduce students to Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism and
Hinduism. The provincial authorities have taken a school to task for
allegedly replacing the compulsory subject of Islamic studies with the study
of Islam and other religions. It has been claimed on
behalf of the Punjab government that under the Pakistan constitution no
Muslim citizen should be taught a religion other than his own. It seems the
Punjab government is guided by a special text of the Constitution because in
the books available to ordinary citizens no such restriction has been
noticed. In any case, the teaching of comparative religion has been banned. The principal of the
school under attack has made a coherent and cogent defence of the school
policy. It deserves to be shared with readers: “We must clarify what
this subject (Comparative Religion) is and why we teach it. Our institution
believes in inculcating values, such as tolerance and empathy, in all our
students. Comparative Religion is essentially a history of religion. It is
not merely comparing religious; we aim to educate our students about Islam,
Christianity, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, and Hinduism and their fundamental
teachings. Doing so, we believe, will enlighten our students about the
importance of peaceful coexistence. “Islam teaches us to
broaden our minds; In fact, it asks us to seek knowledge from the cradle to
the grave. Learning and understanding other religions and cultures will not
and should not threaten our personal beliefs; rather it should strengthen
them. We staunchly believe that this course helps develop better citizens,
informed Muslims and enlightened Pakistanis who are secure about their
identity.” Unfortunately, the doors
to knowledge are being closed on Pakistan’s youth in the name of belief.
But it is doubtful whether those objecting to study of various religions
have properly read the Holy Quran that says that human beings have been
created through a non-denominational process, involving a male and a female,
and have been born into different communities and tribes so that they may
identify one another. How do people identify one another except by learning
about each other’s beliefs, customs, ways of life, their aspirations,
their achievements and their failures? Then, Muslims are often
reminded of the injunction that they must acquire knowledge even if they
have to go to China for that. Now, during the early days of Islam, China was
not known for research in hadith and fiqh and the Muslims going there could
have only acquired secular knowledge. The banning of the study
of Comparative Religion in Pakistan in 2013 reminds one of the decision by a
university to ban any mention of some scientists and philosophers (Newton,
Darwin, Freud, Marx and Einstein) on the campus and the burning of books,
including J.S. Mills’ On liberty during the Ziaul Haq period. Verily, the
ghost of the dictator has found a desk in our rulers’ chamber. All this raises a basic
question regarding the object of education in Pakistan. Where does one find
a declaration of the Pakistani state’s educational philosophy? One cliché-ridden
statement is available in the latest Economic Survey: “Education is the
most important factor, which plays a leading role in human resource
development...” Let us look at the National Education Policy of 2009. One
should like the educationists to define the central purpose of education.
Laymen should also look around, delve into the history of humankind and
analyse the rise of nations through acquisition of knowledge and skills and
it may not be impossible to fix certain goals that should inspire
Pakistan’s philosophy of education. The first principle that
will need to be established is that education must cater to the needs of
both the individual and the community and that its benefits should be
available equitably to all citizens, regardless of their belief, race,
gender, social status or domicile. Acceptance of this
principle will oblige the controllers of affairs at the various levels of
authority — federal, provincial and local — to ensure that every child
has the possibility of discovering and refining whatever talent she or he
has, has maximum opportunities of realising herself or himself. At the same
time, the education system must enable the community to develop and manage
its resources in a manner that it can secure the greatest good of the
greatest number by guaranteeing peace, progress and prosperity. The individual’s
aspiration for self-development and community’s demands for collective
uplift both call for a system that offers the youth access to humankind’s
store of knowledge gathered after centuries of endeavour to which various
communities and peoples have in different ages contributed. Thus, each community must
offer its youth the latest and most developed disciplines in both physical
and social sciences. All individuals and
collectives have their identities and a pluralist society must use education
to ensure frictionless co-existence for all the identities in its fold. This
will require a shared understanding of the community’s past and a true
assessment of its successes and failures at the various turns in its
history. For instance, it will be necessary in Pakistan to treat the history
of all the peoples who have ever lived on its territory as a single,
unbroken narrative and accept the various religions adopted by them, in
Babar’s words, as changing reasons. One hopes Pakistani
educationists and scholars have fully become aware of the cost paid for
persisting with the colonial model of education that excluded instruction in
democratic politics, people-friendly governance, and justice for all
classes. This was necessary to prevent people from participating in the
management of their affairs. Today, education must
transform the passive subjects of the state into active citizens, capable of
finding their way in a highly competitive world. A system of education that
does not equip the people with the ability to develop cordial relations with
their neighbours will make them permanently vulnerable to war-mongers and
compel them to waste their resources on developing more and more lethal
weapons. It is the system of
education that determines what one generation passes on to the next. The
most fundamental question in Pakistan is whether the present generation will
leave for the next generation an order based on the universal values of
freedom, equality and justice or a tradition of communal and sectarian
strife and abuse of technology for mass murders. All bad things do not
originate in politicians’ chambers or generals’ caucuses; much of the
rot begins in our educational institutions. All discussion on education is
meaningless if there is no clarity on what Pakistan wants its citizens to
become.
The News on Sunday
(TNS): As an educationist, what do you think is the essential purpose of
education and do you think what we teach to our children in schools serves
that purpose? Pervez Amirali Hoodbhoy (PAH):
Education is not about cramming facts into young minds or training parrots
to recite perfectly with eyes closed. Nor is it about learning certain exam
techniques — which our O and A level students and their teachers have
mastered brilliantly. The madrassas have their own concept of good
education. But for me — a liberal Pakistani who is not afraid of being
called one — the real goal is to produce well-informed, socially
responsible, thoughtful, and civic-minded individuals. Education creates a
thinking mind that can look at facts to see if they are actually true, and
emphasises the use of reason and observation to make decisions. An educated
person should be able to entertain a thought even without accepting it, and
thus to be able to make informed judgments. For all this it is necessary to
expose students to the accumulated wealth of human experience and knowledge. Do we do that in Pakistan?
Absolutely not! We teach students about Pakistan’s enemies and about
jihad. Everything starts and stops with Islam without even a nod towards the
wonderful diversity of this country’s religions, languages, and cultures.
There’s absolutely nothing in school books about throwing litter on the
streets, preserving the environment, obeying traffic rules, paying taxes, or
respecting the rights of your fellow citizens. Instead, the entire
emphasis is on ritual, tradition, and blind submission to authority. It is
precisely this horrific mis-education — not lack of educational facilities
or insufficient schools — that explains why Pakistani society has become
so exceptionally violent, brutal, and intolerant. We’d be much better off
without this kind of education. TNS: From back in 1984,
when you and A.H. Nayyar examined the history textbooks of Pakistan for the
Air Marshal Asghar Khan’s book Islam, Politics and the State, how have you
seen this ideologically-driven curriculum impact successive generations? PAH: How can one not
notice? It stares you in the face. Having taught at Pakistani universities
for 40 years, I have seen that students coming from our high schools have
poorer and poorer reading and writing skills. They know very little
mathematics, are incapable of coherently articulating an argument, and most
have no sense of politics or history. They are the products of schools that
are factories for mass-producing ignorance and mental retardation. The
Pakistani student today is deficient in basic skills and knowledge both in
relation to the past, and compares poorly with students from India, Iran,
and Bangladesh. Although some super-elite A and O levels schools have
developed the knack of getting high grades for their students, this merely
shows that they are good exam-preparation institutes. Religious policing is
largely responsible for Pakistan’s intellectual desertification and our
rapid transformation into another intellectually sterile Saudi Arabia. There
are hardly any high schools left where vital elements of learning such as
drama, theatre, and musical events are encouraged — or even allowed.
Coeducation even at the primary and middle-school level is disappearing,
leading to an unhealthy and bizarre behaviour of male and female students
when they enter universities and, of course, professional life. TNS: What is it exactly
that stops us in Pakistan from changing the curriculum and making it more
sensitive to religious diversity and less prone to militancy, violence,
bigotry and distortion of history etc? Is it the lack of political will or
is the political class plain helpless? PAH: We Pakistanis suffer
from a deep feeling of insecurity, and fear the truth might become too
widely known. To cover up we teach our students lie after lie, instilling
paranoia and xenophobia. We do not discuss the loss of half of Pakistan
because that might endanger the holy Two Nation Theory, we refuse to teach
comparative religions because that might establish other religions as
legitimate systems of belief, and we vilify all who are different from us.
The result: the horrific recent slaughter at the Peshawar church, Alamdar
Road, and countless bombings remain unprotested by all except a tiny sliver
of the population. We have lost our humanity — and this is squarely a
consequence of the hate-filled, mind-warping poisons injected into young
minds through their schools. TNS: Where do you think do
the faults lie — in the making of the education policy, the making of the
curricula or the textbooks? Who decides the content of the textbooks?
PAH: You see that most
clearly in KPK, where the PTI government plans to re-inject violence,
virulence, and aggression into the new textbooks just months after taking
over. These hate materials had been partially removed in 2006 by the ANP
government. The ideologically bankrupt PTI leadership has succumbed to
pressure from its ally and partner, the Jamaat-e-Islami. The religious
organisations are often helped by their ideological allies, the bureaucrats
of various education ministries. I found this out 10-15 years ago when I was
a member of a government-appointed federal education reform committee. Our
committee’s numerous proposals for reforming school education were either
opposed, ignored, or mutilated out of recognition. Minutes of meetings were
frequently changed, twisted around, and manipulated as seen fit. Not
surprisingly what emerged at the end of several months were mere platitudes.
Add to this that the English used was so poor that one had difficulty in
deciphering the minutes. For example I invite anyone to explain to me the
following recommendation: “females must be oriented for mental health”! TNS: Some people are of
the view that multiple education systems and not a uniform system is the
answer. But in one recent case we have seen that one private school system
was shamed on the media for trying to have a more inclusive approach. What
is the potential of private education system in bringing about a positive
change? PAH: Yes, I saw that
shameful blackmailing of a progressive school that had tried to teach
comparative religions. That semi-literate, bigoted anchor should be taken to
court for lying through his teeth. Paradoxically he sends his kids to an
“O” or “A” level school because he does not want them to be
indigenised in a madrassa — and then probably wants them to go to America
for university education. Of course, such people scream about the burqa ban
in France and the Swiss minarets — but that is the typical hypocrisy of
our times. In Pakistani society all crimes, no matter how heinous, are
tolerated as long as one can shout loudly enough that Islam is in danger. As
for privatising education: this is absolutely no solution because most
private schools are ones that are run by religious organisations or groups
with their own private agendas. Often these are very sectarian ones — the
very ones that are tearing our society apart. TNS: Even if,
hypothetically speaking, the curriculum is changed for the better, how will
the mindset of the teacher be changed who is a product of the same system
and gets shaped by other influences like the media? Do you have any
suggestions for that? PAH: I have no
suggestions. The mindset of our teachers is no different from that of a
street person. He or she merely transmits onwards the currently held values
and beliefs, and is not any more or less enlightened. Education will change
when values and beliefs change across the board. The task is immense and
only time will tell if this can happen or not. For now it seems that we have
decided to chase out or physically eliminate all religious minorities.
That’s the first stage. Later, we will become yet another Muslim country
destroyed by civil war between Muslim factions each claiming to represent
the true Islam. Look across the length and breadth of the Middle East and
come to your own conclusions.
|
|
