Few rumblings from a FB discussion on what ails our learning methodologies....
Learning
In one way we are 'students' all our life. But I would restrict that definition of student to Classroom students, in this blog. In my understanding, there are 3 levels of learning from a student's perspective.
1. Knowing (Tamasic) 2. Understanding (Rajasik) 3. Realizing (Sattvik).
Most people 'know'. They will be able to repeat an answer in whichever way a question is formed. Once they 'know' they will get satisfied and stop further probing. These people are whom we call 'average' students. These are Tamasic people who carry what they know in their brain as it is (undigested) and will lose it over a period.
Some people 'understand'. They will be able to apply their knowledge mathematically or analytically and solve problems related to it on paper. These people are whom we call experts, intelligent students. Such people go to IITs and other prestigious institutions. These are Rajasik people who digest/interact with the information, but cannot use its nutrients to enrich them.
Very few 'realize'. They will be able to apply their knowledge to practical problems in life and solve them. They will be able to relate their knowledge to reality, state a problem and they will try to derive a solution. These people are rare breed in India. These are sattvik who digest the information and use its nutrients.
There is a fourth type that i did not cover. They are 'mug-ups' and 'vomit' because they do not even 'know'. These are nir-gunas who gorgle and throw it away.
At all times all these types of people will exist.
Same person may exhibit different gunas to different subjects depending on their liking or environment. If we want to move people from nirguna to tamasic to rajasik to sattvik, then it can only be done by teachers (guru).
Teaching
Teachers are also of four types.
Nir-guna teachers who just read out from text-books. Students don't have any inspiration from such teachers.
Tamasic teachers who read and try to explain without themselves understanding it fully. Here students get to know but cannot understand much.
Rajasik teachers who read, explain with examples from their understanding, but cannot match it to practical worldly daily applications. Students under Rajasik teachers understand and want to know more, but don't have a thirst to realize or if they have such a realization thirst, it does not quenched.
Sattvik teachers who transfer their realization. Students under sattvik teachers are inspired to learn more on their own as their thirst for subject is activated.
A Guru is a sattvik teacher who shares that realization, identifies and invokes that thirst in right students.
System
We need to have more 'Gurus'. We need to have better infrastructure in schools that these gurus can exploit.
Our education system should allow students to set their own goal category in every subject.The level of evaluation and assessment should be different for each of these goal categories.
Students should categorize themselves as 'Sattvik/Realize', 'Rajasik/understand' and 'Tamasik/know' in every subject and aspire to be that. May be we can have a stipulation that atleast in one subject they need to be sattvik/realizers, and one related subject be 'Rajasik/Understand'.
But right from Class 5 every student should set their own goal in every subject. They will undergo different evaluation and assessment for a subject based on their aspiration of goal of being a realizer or understander or just a knower.
A person interested in physics may chose to be a realizer in Physics and undergo tough evaluation and assessment. The same person may chose to be a knower in biology and may undergo a different and lighter evaluation in biology. He may score 90% in physics and 100% in biology, but his realization domain is physics.
Students can change their goal categories in different subjects as they grow and learn more. Such a system forces students to participate fully in their learning process. Students have to decide to what level they are learning in every subject. Currently learning is thrust on students. But this system forces students to participate wholeheartedly in the learning process and makes them responsible for their learning, while giving them lot of space and time to experiment.
This way students from Class 5 to 10 will be able to observe themselves and choose a stream of education in their 11th based on their own assessment. They will be able to choose a higher stream based on how they have shaped themselves in their schools.
Gurukul
That's exactly what an ancient Gurukul did. (Modern gurukuls are rote-learning schools, not talking about them). In an ancient gurukul, a guru determined the level of a student in a domain and worked with them to improve it. A Kshatriya, Brahmana and Vaizya may be in same gurukul. But their aspirational goals in different subjects are different.
A guru enabled them by setting different targets for different students in different domains, with targets set by students based on their professional background or aspiration. A kshatriya's aspirational goal for sword-fighting may be at realizer level, while for a Brahman it may be just a knower level.
Ofcourse it was largely a 'caste' system, where students aligned their aspirations to their caste based profession, though there are examples of exceptions. Today we don't have a birth-based professional system. But we can learn from that system, things that we can utilize in our environment.
In such a system, it is not possible to compare 'marks' of students as different students might have chosen different levels. Even in students of same goal category, every student may have a different combination of goal categories, it would be near impossible to say who is the 'best' as goal category combinations may be unique.
Such a system will be a great alternative to rote-learning systems that we have. Our rote-learning system extends not just to graduate education, but even in post-graduation, which defeats the purpose of graduation and post-graduation. So many higher institutes of learning also fail in their ultimate objective.
Govt focus on School education
Are all these possible with huge population..?
Yes, very much. Actually easy. If Govt focuses on school education.
In that light, some of the steps taken by the Govt of Delhi towards school educations is worth mentioning.
First they allocated 24% of their budget to education, which is a revolution in India. Of-course it is a city-state unlike real full-fledged states. But that's a huge increase when compared to previous budgets of the Delhi Govt itself. Ofcourse we can't say now how much is reaching the people actually. We have to wait and see.
Second they are revamping school infrastructure in a very big way. How much effective it is, has to be seen. But the intent to spend on school infrastructure is a good one.
Third they are spending money making 'Gurus' out of teachers by upgrading the faculty skills, exposing them to various teaching and learning methodologies. Again, the effectiveness has to be seen. We can only comment on intent at this point of time.
Fourth, but the most important point, they take pride in comparing Govt school results with Private school results. It is actually a dangerous thing for the Govt to claim School results as its measurable achievement, as if Govt school results dip, it is a shame for the Govt and opposition will paint it as a Govt failure. But it is a great step to paint Govt school results as a measurable achievement of Govt. It is very much needed in India in all the states.
This is not to suggest that Delhi Govt is following the system that I have described here or they have achieved great results. This is just to say that Governments with their financial and political 'might' have to focus on education at school level and contribute to revamping it. They have to make School education results, in particular Govt School education results as a measurable mark of Govt performance.
In revamping our system, we should also learn from our past, fine-tune the methodologies to our environment and not just leave with some cosmetic changes.
-TBT
Learning
In one way we are 'students' all our life. But I would restrict that definition of student to Classroom students, in this blog. In my understanding, there are 3 levels of learning from a student's perspective.
1. Knowing (Tamasic) 2. Understanding (Rajasik) 3. Realizing (Sattvik).
Most people 'know'. They will be able to repeat an answer in whichever way a question is formed. Once they 'know' they will get satisfied and stop further probing. These people are whom we call 'average' students. These are Tamasic people who carry what they know in their brain as it is (undigested) and will lose it over a period.
Some people 'understand'. They will be able to apply their knowledge mathematically or analytically and solve problems related to it on paper. These people are whom we call experts, intelligent students. Such people go to IITs and other prestigious institutions. These are Rajasik people who digest/interact with the information, but cannot use its nutrients to enrich them.
Very few 'realize'. They will be able to apply their knowledge to practical problems in life and solve them. They will be able to relate their knowledge to reality, state a problem and they will try to derive a solution. These people are rare breed in India. These are sattvik who digest the information and use its nutrients.
There is a fourth type that i did not cover. They are 'mug-ups' and 'vomit' because they do not even 'know'. These are nir-gunas who gorgle and throw it away.
At all times all these types of people will exist.
Same person may exhibit different gunas to different subjects depending on their liking or environment. If we want to move people from nirguna to tamasic to rajasik to sattvik, then it can only be done by teachers (guru).
Teaching
Teachers are also of four types.
Nir-guna teachers who just read out from text-books. Students don't have any inspiration from such teachers.
Tamasic teachers who read and try to explain without themselves understanding it fully. Here students get to know but cannot understand much.
Rajasik teachers who read, explain with examples from their understanding, but cannot match it to practical worldly daily applications. Students under Rajasik teachers understand and want to know more, but don't have a thirst to realize or if they have such a realization thirst, it does not quenched.
Sattvik teachers who transfer their realization. Students under sattvik teachers are inspired to learn more on their own as their thirst for subject is activated.
A Guru is a sattvik teacher who shares that realization, identifies and invokes that thirst in right students.
System
We need to have more 'Gurus'. We need to have better infrastructure in schools that these gurus can exploit.
Our education system should allow students to set their own goal category in every subject.The level of evaluation and assessment should be different for each of these goal categories.
Students should categorize themselves as 'Sattvik/Realize', 'Rajasik/understand' and 'Tamasik/know' in every subject and aspire to be that. May be we can have a stipulation that atleast in one subject they need to be sattvik/realizers, and one related subject be 'Rajasik/Understand'.
But right from Class 5 every student should set their own goal in every subject. They will undergo different evaluation and assessment for a subject based on their aspiration of goal of being a realizer or understander or just a knower.
A person interested in physics may chose to be a realizer in Physics and undergo tough evaluation and assessment. The same person may chose to be a knower in biology and may undergo a different and lighter evaluation in biology. He may score 90% in physics and 100% in biology, but his realization domain is physics.
Students can change their goal categories in different subjects as they grow and learn more. Such a system forces students to participate fully in their learning process. Students have to decide to what level they are learning in every subject. Currently learning is thrust on students. But this system forces students to participate wholeheartedly in the learning process and makes them responsible for their learning, while giving them lot of space and time to experiment.
This way students from Class 5 to 10 will be able to observe themselves and choose a stream of education in their 11th based on their own assessment. They will be able to choose a higher stream based on how they have shaped themselves in their schools.
Gurukul
That's exactly what an ancient Gurukul did. (Modern gurukuls are rote-learning schools, not talking about them). In an ancient gurukul, a guru determined the level of a student in a domain and worked with them to improve it. A Kshatriya, Brahmana and Vaizya may be in same gurukul. But their aspirational goals in different subjects are different.
A guru enabled them by setting different targets for different students in different domains, with targets set by students based on their professional background or aspiration. A kshatriya's aspirational goal for sword-fighting may be at realizer level, while for a Brahman it may be just a knower level.
Ofcourse it was largely a 'caste' system, where students aligned their aspirations to their caste based profession, though there are examples of exceptions. Today we don't have a birth-based professional system. But we can learn from that system, things that we can utilize in our environment.
In such a system, it is not possible to compare 'marks' of students as different students might have chosen different levels. Even in students of same goal category, every student may have a different combination of goal categories, it would be near impossible to say who is the 'best' as goal category combinations may be unique.
Such a system will be a great alternative to rote-learning systems that we have. Our rote-learning system extends not just to graduate education, but even in post-graduation, which defeats the purpose of graduation and post-graduation. So many higher institutes of learning also fail in their ultimate objective.
Govt focus on School education
Are all these possible with huge population..?
Yes, very much. Actually easy. If Govt focuses on school education.
In that light, some of the steps taken by the Govt of Delhi towards school educations is worth mentioning.
First they allocated 24% of their budget to education, which is a revolution in India. Of-course it is a city-state unlike real full-fledged states. But that's a huge increase when compared to previous budgets of the Delhi Govt itself. Ofcourse we can't say now how much is reaching the people actually. We have to wait and see.
Second they are revamping school infrastructure in a very big way. How much effective it is, has to be seen. But the intent to spend on school infrastructure is a good one.
Third they are spending money making 'Gurus' out of teachers by upgrading the faculty skills, exposing them to various teaching and learning methodologies. Again, the effectiveness has to be seen. We can only comment on intent at this point of time.
Fourth, but the most important point, they take pride in comparing Govt school results with Private school results. It is actually a dangerous thing for the Govt to claim School results as its measurable achievement, as if Govt school results dip, it is a shame for the Govt and opposition will paint it as a Govt failure. But it is a great step to paint Govt school results as a measurable achievement of Govt. It is very much needed in India in all the states.
This is not to suggest that Delhi Govt is following the system that I have described here or they have achieved great results. This is just to say that Governments with their financial and political 'might' have to focus on education at school level and contribute to revamping it. They have to make School education results, in particular Govt School education results as a measurable mark of Govt performance.
In revamping our system, we should also learn from our past, fine-tune the methodologies to our environment and not just leave with some cosmetic changes.
-TBT
Last edited:
