By Bhawesh Pant and Shafey Anwarul Haque
Aligarh Muslim University recently celebrated a hundred years of its establishment. The prestigious institution was established as Mohammadan Anglo-Oriental (MAO) College in 1877 by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan and became Aligarh Muslim University in 1920 by an act of the parliament.
On the occasion of the centenary celebration of the varsity, the Prime Minister of India along with the Education Minister virtually participated as chief guest and guest of honour respectively. Quite before the event could be kicked off, debates revolved around PM’s participation; a section of students and teachers from the Aligarh Muslim University opposed it while others believed it would help reduce the rift between the BJP led government and Muslims in general and the institution in particular and would bring positive changes in the inter-community relationships in India. After the event, most of us began comprehending his address and predicting what impact it might bring in the days to come. But amid everything, we think, something has been missed- something intrinsic and significant.
What really strikes our mind when we talk about ‘educational institutions? Research, innovation and academic excellence, publications and citations, teaching and learning culture, gender discourse in the campus etc., but look, on the occasion of one of India’s premier institution’s centenary year, what we are engaged with?
We, at the university campus and outside, keep ourselves busy with an open avowal of our greatness and boast of some prominent alumni, but lest we forget, our efforts and commitment, not history, can make our institution great. Thus, the first thing we must note is, we should alternate our addicted habit of taking refuge to the archaic accomplishments of the stalwart alumni, instead we should prepare ourselves to face the callous reality which reveals a sluggish and dormant course of thought prevailing in the university.
It is, of course, a matter of great pride that we’re a part of a premier institution, but this acknowledgement also amplifies our responsibilities towards our institution. We can, in our capacity, at least highlight the domains which, we think, require improvement in the interest of students. First among them is undoubtedly the antediluvian curriculum and syllabus which we follow; it demands immediate upgradation. ‘The syllabus reflects the critical processes of learning and unlearning of knowledge in the university,’ says Shiv Visvanathan, noted scholar and academician. Though this issue is common among most of the institutions in India and has been raised time and again by scholars and academicians but to no avail.
Eminent scientist and Bharat Ratna awardee C. N. R. Rao, during the Visitor’s Conference at Rashtrapati Bhawan in 2015 also highlighted, '90 per cent of the universities in our country have the outdated curriculum. We talk about increasing funds, increasing infrastructure but there is no improvement in the content we are teaching in our hi-tech classrooms'. So, it’s our primordial duty to gain the attention of all the concerned authorities in and outside the campus and also invite students from other universities to endorse our ideas.
Next important thing, we believe, for any student is the methods of learning. As students, we can’t propose amendments in the methods of teaching, but we certainly can, and should, evaluate the ways of learning we’re adapted to.
In an institution like ours, which is equipped with a few very efficient faculty members and all best possible resources including one of the largest libraries in Asia, why we study only for grades and not to learn or gain knowledge? As a monumental part of an educational institution, it seems we have crushed our abilities, laid down our arms and relinquished ourselves to be a machine.
A great scholar once said, ‘Don’t just read, absorb. Don’t just learn, experience. Don’t just think, ponder. Don’t just dream, do’. Even PhD students, including the authors, don’t look to be very sincere. During admission, we strongly protest against negligence in admission process but why we don’t talk about the quality of research and publications? The institution basks in its glory but strangely enough, many of our departments don’t have a peer-reviewed journal, leave alone Scopus indexed or Web of Science indexed journals. Let’s wonder why?
Again, we the species of academic ecology have a perennial habit of scribbling a lot on the notion of academic freedom, but it seems hard to address chunk of ‘social responsibility’ expected from the university. The university as a ‘space of epistemological interactions’ should be the paradise of liberal values; ‘Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high; Where knowledge is free; Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic walls.’ (Hoping Rabindranath Tagore will excuse us for his abrupt mention.)
This humble attempt tries to bring forth the germane fault lines (both structural and attitudinal) that hinder the functioning of AMU. And on the occasion of the 100th anniversary, it becomes imperative to acknowledge the deficit and begin working besides emphasizing our distinct culture and traditions.
Apart from this, there are yet many other issues that need to be addressed both by students and faculty members. We would very modestly like to highlight some of them. For instance, the rampant inbreeding both at faculty and student-level leads to ‘epistemological homogenising’ where few thoughts gain normative acclamation and several are disavowed with heavy handedness. This very curtailing turns many contemporary thoughts ‘institutionally untouchables'.
Moreover, we still hold a primitive and unintelligible understanding of gender issues. Social stereotypes are too prevalent in the campus, consequently, gender inequality is very common. Its high time to address gender issues and ensure remedial action to female students and workforce.
The notion of sexuality is clichéd as well. Any open discussions on sexuality with varied participation is a distant reality in AMU. Prof. Ramchandra Siras’s case has not been, and will never be forgotten. Also, we have still not learnt to cherish the diversity and differences, so one can spot an individual hailing from left episteme being a laughing stock among its peers. The passage to excellence that was expected from the institution of AMU’s calibre lost its charm, this chaman (as vernacularly called) turned into a centriole of nepotism, regionalism and toxic masculinity.
To cut the long story short, each stakeholder of the AMU should prioritise itself to curate a conducive 'environ' for the knowledge flourishment. And a confession, the authors humbly admits the share of benefits they draw from the manifestations of rampant mediocrity prevailing in the varsity.
Bhawesh Pant is an AMU alumnus and currently a Research Scholar at the Tata Institute of Social Sciences. Shafey Anwarul Haque is a Research Scholar at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU).
No comments: