Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Arkitect India]: Common School System

Expand Messages
  • Sarwat Ali
    Pankaj sb, Why government schools fail is a big question, that needs to be answered, before blaming them for their failure. This needs an intensive research.
    Message 1 of 86 , Feb 9, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Pankaj sb,

      Why government schools fail is a big question, that needs to be answered, before blaming them for their failure. This needs an intensive research.

      However i based on my experience of visiting these schools share with you all only the minimum basics that hinder learning: 

      - pupil teacher ratio: one teacher and more than 40 students. Even the best teacher would fail to help them learn and would get demotivated to work.

      - There is just space for two children to sit, no space for them to keep their bags(MCD school) . The result is that the desks which are basically for working, have bags on them. This situation forces the teacher to opt to verbally talk and and use black board if available. However the learning theories inform that children learn when they actively participate, where is the space, what ever space is available is utilized to keep bags on them. 

      The glasses of the window are broken, so either the children and teacher are too cold or too hot, who would like to teach or learn if one is only thinking about how to make oneself comfortable.

      - Mid day meals are served but there is no exclusive space for them to sit and eat, children would be seen either sitting on the floor/walking through the corridors and eating The corridors have food all over after the lunch.

      - NCERT have made very colorful books so that children learn, but till mid session/ late session  the children have no books, because of what ever reason. 

      Teachers have no space of their own to store if at all they wish to arrange/ prepare teaching learning material. 

      No toilets, if they are there, it would be better not to discuss their condition.

      If there is voucher system, or school choice, some/ many children would go to these schools what about the rest, they would come back to these same schools, so the constitutional provision of equitable education does not get full filled. 

      I believe you agree to this constitutional provision of equitable education, which can not be achieved through two kinds of school, so either it should be government schools or privates schools. I would be curious to know which among the two you choose? Would you support closure of  government  schools completely. 

      best 

      Sarwat 






      On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Pankaj Jain <pjain2002@...> wrote:
       

      @ "CSS is the one way of organizing the school system "

      As long as you take CSS as only one way, and not ideologically determined solution, you should go only be empirical evidence of the common-universal (almost) failure of Govt. schools to meet even minimal educational goals, and must have major doubts if CSS, (monopoly Government school system) is the best way to provide constitutionally mandated school education of good quality to all.

      Pankaj 

       

      --- On Fri, 2/8/13, Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...> wrote:

      From: Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...>
      Subject: Re: [Arkitect India]: Common School System
      To: arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Friday, February 8, 2013, 8:13 PM


       

      For me it is not social engineering, but strenghthening our Constitutional provisions including the Preamble which are democratically endorsed. CSS is the one way of organizing the school system that will enable this. It is impossible to talk of quality education without ideas on, as Surjit says, education for what?

      On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Pankaj Jain <pjain2002@...> wrote:
       

      Dear Surjit and Janaki,

      Thanks for helping me understand-articulate the source of our differences.

      For me, the only purpose and goal of schools is to provide 'good quality education', as agreed and articulated by our democratic processes in the form of national-state currculum. So, CSS or any other alternative is truly a strategy to achieve this goal.

      For you school is a part-tool of social engineering to create a 'society' of your liking, which is yet not democratically endorsed.

      I think our goals are different, so there is little point in discussing CSS. It may or may not be a good tool of social engineering, but it surly is inappropriate for ensuring good quality of school education to maximum possible number of children, which is my goal for any type of school system.

      Pankaj

      --- On Thu, 2/7/13, Surjit Thokchom <ssthokchom@...> wrote:

      From: Surjit Thokchom <ssthokchom@...>

      Subject: Re: [Arkitect India]: Common School System
      To: arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Thursday, February 7, 2013, 9:27 PM


       

      Dear Pankaj, 

      From your  mails, two things reveal:
      1. You take CSS-NS as a strategy.
      2. Education as politically neutral deliverable items just like food through PDS. 
      The above two notions are wrong. CSS-NS is neither a strategy nor a method of  governance. It is far more higher and deeper. It is a social and political vision. It is an alternative educational philosophy. For many of us, we make mistake of looking to  school education as an issue of children only. There is a need to debate on the issue of education. what is education ? what kind of education is needed ? What kind of country we would like to build up ? What kind of society we endevour ?  

      regards 
      surjit 
         

      On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Pankaj Jain <pjain2002@...> wrote:
       

      Janaki,

      @ "The litmus test of ideas is integrity and coherence of ideas."

      I guess, it is the source of our difference. For me, the litmus test of the idea is the actual achievement of the goal that the idea is trying to reach. There have been plenty of wrong idea that were coherent and their proponents had integrity, be it Mao's cultural revolution, Stalin's communism, or Talibani Islamism.

      If the professed goal of 'common school system' is good quality education for all, and then practical attainment of this goal alone should be the litmus test for validating its rationale, and if all the empirical evidence shows it to be incoherent with reality, then I am afraid it fails the litmus test.

      As far as your advice of seriously engaging with Anil's idea, let me share a personal fact. When I was studying in IIMA and felt like seeing-understanding a different world 36 years back, Kishore Bharti was the first stop on my pilgrimage. Also, once I decided to leave job and get into a different mode, 16 years back, I again started by spending a couple of days in going with Anil in an event he had organized. So, I have been seriously engaged with Anil's ideas for 36 years, but engagement does-should not mean agreement, when evidence is to the contrary.     

      One way to ensure that schooling of children is decided and approved by the parents of the most margianlised, which is your professed desire, is to give them money which they can use to send their child to a school of their choice. If the Govt.gives the money that it now spends in schools paying 6th Pay Commission Salary, (which comes to more than Rs. 15000/- year), the parents of most marginalized will be able to exercise the choice available to > 90% of Indian parents. (Incidentally, I do not support even 50% school vouchers, as it will be as bad idea as 100% common school system).  

      Pankaj

      --- On Thu, 2/7/13, Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...> wrote:

      From: Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...>

      Subject: Re: [Arkitect India]: Common School System
      To: arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Thursday, February 7, 2013, 2:09 AM


       

      Hi,
       
      Very heartened with the instant recognition and agreement in acknowledging and naming the person and his ideas. For too long, we have shied away from ideas that resonate, and as they say, to be silent in endorsing and supporting is the worst thing we can do towards what we hold to be true.
       
      Quick response to Pankaj: Good people, bad ideas splintering-The litmus test of ideas is integrity and coherence of ideas. Anil cannot be faulted on either count. Advise you carefully examine his ideas and the coherence of his ideas- we are all committed people here, trying to coem to grips with what we should spend doing 24x7 over next 20 years. The good person bad ideas split is pratonizing-and more imortantly displays your inability to engage with his ideas of common school system because you have in your mind trashed it (as so many others) as an impossible idea-open your mind and revisit the idea?
       
      I stand for, and to the best of my knowledge Anil also does, to the idea of a neighbourhood school which is common (not common as bad common, third class, janta) of excellent quality where all our children can learn. To be funded by government, mangaged by community represented equitably. Role of NGOs, Private sector, sure! But, in this system, the NGOS, private sector, cannot influence policy-they have to be at the service of the community-No wheeling dealing with the privileged section of the community, in the name of efficiency in public and deals in priavte-whatever role any sector has will be decided and approved by the parents of the most margianlised-so civil society, privileged parents, beware-you will have to come up with ideas that enables all children equal opportunity for success, not just your own! 
       
      Janaki  
       


       
      On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Guru गुरु <Guru@...> wrote:
       

      dear Pankaj

      one fundamental problem is your idelogical assumptions about the role/nature of government - that it is outside us, it is evil/inefficient/incurable (may not be words you use, but the spirit of your ideology). hence laissez faire. and the corresponding complete faith in the individual and in private enterprise.

      but i would submit that both the public and private need to co-exist. most economic goods are perhaps better provided by private enterprise (competition/markets). but there are many 'goods/services' which are not best suited to private provisioning. and apart from defence, law and order, even a classical economist like adam smith included education in this.

      Anything that is left to private provisioning/market forces will tend to be stratified in its supply and the wealthy can claim 'better' quality of the goods/services since their purchasing power is higher.

      whereas many believe that all children irrespective of their birth/status are entitled to education
      of an equitable quality. only a public system can possibly ensure this. while governments may have several structural deficiencies and demerits, the solution lies in the direction of reforming (including bringing in checks and balances on any monopolies) and even maturing these institutions and hence our efforts are best utilised in working to strengthen and reform public schools and the public school system.

      and not abandoning them or consistently believing them to be no good. privatising will create greater hierarchies where each will chose according to what they can pay and that is no good. the rich go to the rich private schools and the poor to the poor private schools.

      guru




      On 02/06/2013 08:49 AM, Pankaj Jain wrote:
       

      Dear All,

      I guess, we need to separate good people from good-bad ideas.

      While no body should doubt the commitment and dedication of people like Anil Sadgopal, a reasonable case can be made out that all his ideas are not good for Indian children's education.

      Given that Indian state is easy to be hijacked as the instrument of bureaucratic, political and other types of vested interests, giving it monopoly of children's education and future is highly dangerous. The common school system, supported by Anil ji and many others, gives monopoly of children's education to the state, which is not a good idea.

      Anyway, till mid-1990s, whole of rural India had only common school system as envisaged by Anil ji, and it did not do much good. As regards equity, there are other equally effective ways to achieve that, without giving monopoly power to the State.

      So my appeal is to separate good people from good-bad idea, and deal with people and ideas independently of each other.

      Pankaj


       

      --- On Tue, 2/5/13, Kavita Krishnan <kavitakrish73@...> wrote:

      From: Kavita Krishnan <kavitakrish73@...>
      Subject: Re: [Arkitect India]
      To: arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Tuesday, February 5, 2013, 5:01 PM

       

      Anil Sadgopal.... of course...

      On 3 February 2013 02:04, Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...> wrote:
       

      Hi,

      Have been following the progress(?) in the states on RTE. Its a no go.
      There is no way the government is going that will beacon for children.
      And it is not going to be different with any other government. Have
      seen all the players in action and have come to the conclusion that
      there is only one whose person's vision and roadmap which can make
      our children's future bright. That person has been taken for a ride,
      been denigrated too often-whay should he care? We should care though.
      His chapter on the Bihar Common School Commission should be enough for
      those who really care for the future of our children-read it
      carefully. He is in his seventies already. His photographic memory,
      awesome intellect, passion and commitment that is on the top 0.01% of
      the intellect of this world [aks Cal Tech!] is rotting because he has
      chosen to work in and for India where one listens or lesser minds
      listen onyl to denigrate. If there is nothing any of us will ever do
      in our lives, it will be ok, if we can get this gift to India to feel
      honoured and respected and provide space for him to sketch and pen a
      road map for the future of India's children. We, individuals, interest
      groups, officers, political people may not need him, but the children
      of India need him. Can we sink our egos and self interests to do this?
      Because if we do not, the children will never forgive us. i dont think
      I need to name this person.

      Janaki









      --
      Dr (Ms) sarwat ali
      pocket A/3C sukhdev Vihar , DDA Flats, 
      New Delhi - 110025

      9810525317


    • Satish Jha
      If we start with a wrong premise, where do we hope to land up? Our education system has been broken for as long as we may like to recall. It s results are
      Message 86 of 86 , Mar 3, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        If we start with a wrong premise, where do we hope to land up?

        Our education system has been broken for as long as we may like to recall. It's results are there for all to see whether we may agree or not. Just to start with, has the system inhabited by the population if the entire affluent world- the US, Europe, Japan, Australia and all other OECD countries put together produced any idea that is globally acceptable, any Nobel laureate from the Indian soil, any product that has found acceptance across the planet?

        If not, is it because of some grand design or the way we learn, understand our environment, the way the world works or anything else?

        I have come to be persuaded by the argument that its the way we groom our people from early childhood that has greatly determined the way things have turned out.

        Children are born geniuses, each in their unique ways and we work very hard to make them like us. Our education system does that job reasonably and keeps us all at peace while sacrificing the potential we bring to the world.

        Unless we begin to think that we the consumers of knowledge created by other societies and therefore consistent followers rather than leaders of the learning process have to acknowledge our limitations in guiding the next generations in the way they learn, little will change.

        Yashpal or Rajni are all product of their times. To look into the future, we need to look ahead and align with those who are shaping the future, whatever way it may turn out.

        So let us pause and rethink. Not the way the ancestors drew the lines. The way the architects of future are drawing it now.




        Sent from my iPad
        Satish Jha
        Pinewood Partners LLC

        On Mar 2, 2013, at 10:56 PM, juristashok@... wrote:

         

        Dear friends, due to change of mobile phone, I do not have your mobile nos. Kindly write your mobile nos.
        Advocate Ashok Agarwal
        Email juristashok@...
        M-09811101930

        Sent on my BlackBerry® from Vodafone

        From: Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...>
        Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2013 02:15:58 +0530
        Subject: Re: [Arkitect India]: Common School System

         

        I think we should examine ideas from Learning without Burden, and the principle of contextualising education that NCF offers. To my mind, the former offers analysis of what happens in school-textbook systems and the latter provides possibilities towards the way forward, using context as tool to be heard and matter. Yash Pal's latest idea in this, that learning has to be driven by learners is fine with me in principle, and furthers the ideas of learnign without burden and contextualization. But, there is a problem in each of thse ideas. That textbooks must loosen up has happened to some extent, but to what end? It has unleashed laiisez faire when combined with little understood CCE to become a convenient tool to let withdraw from engagement with learning. Every State and CBSE too, has used these documents to create situations which Rajni Kothari once lamented about-let us give each child along with birth certificate, a degree certificate.
         
        As I try to mine Yash Pal's remarks, I have to say that I am beginning to agree with Irfan Habib on the NCF.
         
        Before I get into that, I have the following questions:
        Learner agency to choose their learning  pre supposses that all learners are equal in the platform of schooling. They are so not! Problem with both Learnign without Burden and NCF is that both shy away from the fundamental problem that all children are not rendered equal automatically by virtue of being in a classroom. both documents shy away from the 'd' word-discrimination.
         
        So, Yash Pal's current thing about child wanting to choose what they want to learn poses several problems for me. Firstly, the child ALWAYS learns what he or she wants to learn from the classroom whether the teacher or parents like it or not. And, his or her likes matter zilch to curriculum, pedagogy however eased by non-dense textbooks or appeals to context.
         
        Only way all of YP ideas can make sense is if we it is disaggregated and  factors in the current fractured and discriminatory space that is today's classroom.  Without that discourse, we cannot leapfrog into a nice little space when children are little sicentists and teachers are resepectful research assistants.
         
        I absolutely get what Yash Pal was trying to do-but there is no process in this, except after the fact! Elegant and persuasive as the post facto processes are, it doesnt capture the popular imagination!
         
        Since 1994, our educational landscape has been shaped by Yash Pal and his colleagues. Time to, in a nice, but no nonsense way, re-visit this? Is it not what criticality, scientific temper is all about?
         
        Janaki

        On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...> wrote:
         Yes, teacher education has been reduced to farcical proportions. Can we visualise, as civil society, a framework for teacher education which remembers that teachers were once or are aspiring young men and women? A civil society framework fo rteacher education?


        On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 6:10 AM, rajagopalan ss <ssrajagopalan@...> wrote:
         

        Teacher Education ed thcontinues to be not only neglected but abused a lot. The NCTE established with a lot of fanfare to raise the quality of Teacher Education is responsible for mushrooming of Teacher Education Institutions without any human and physical resources. They are money-spinning institutions with gullible young men and women their easy preys. Faculty with paper qualification but without any understanding of child pedagogy are in charge. While earlier they were monitored by the Education Department and Universities, now they are left alone. The quality of Teacher Education has taken a deep slide. I am not able to understand the logic behind TET's under these circumstances. In Tamilnadu only less than 3% have cleared the TET's. Is it a verdict on those taking the tests or on the institutions that have imparted Teacher Education? As a number of a High Power Committee, I came across a Head of Teacher Education Department of a University that he had no need to know what is happening to the school curriculum in the State. He said that he was appearing before the Committee because his VC had asked him to. Teacher Education is a serious issue on which we have to concentrate much.
        ssr

        To: arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com
        From: rajan.janaki@...
        Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 23:13:48 +0530

        Subject: Re: [Arkitect India]: Common School System

         

        Dear Yash Pal,
         
        I have been thinking about your comment over the last few days. I will certainly meet you to talk about whenever it is convenient to you. However, we have received several responses to your comment and it is only right to continue this conversation also in this platform.
         
        Education is a much burdened term historically- aspirationally, strategically, managerially, frighteningly and in rare moments for a rare few, illuminatingly. For the purspose of our conversation let us talk of children and learning.
         
        My readings of respectable child development readers led me to believe that over centuries, conception of childhood has undergone changes, ranging from 17c when they were little adults, to 18c when they were children with 'shaitani' which had to be beaten out of them, stemming from Calvinism, to Rousseau who rescued children from their progenitors' predilictions with societal norms, through to Montessorie who clinically established the awesome abilities of prenatal, neo natal, infancy, toddlers and very young children, which Piaget, Kohlberg among others,  followed through to adolescence in western world, while Vygotsky challenged the individualness of these conceptions and elegantly establishing that learning is socially constructed. My readings told me that the idea of childhood is a very recent phenomenon in the history of the world-paintings of 17c show children dressed as mini-adults,toys did not exist till 19c. QED. The only reading of Indian setting I engaged with was sudhir Kakar's Inner World, which provides a fascinating (disturbing, but real ) notion of chidhood in India. In the 20 years I have taught these concepts, I have taught them side by side (never the twain shall meet, etc.) 
         
        Last week, I was in Nalanda to around a 100 young men aged 25-30, trapped (I use the term advisedly) in a DIET as students of the D.Ed. Course for 5 hours a day-2 teacher educators, no reading materials. These young men will live and make a life in their villages, blocks and districts. Their life horizon does nto even include PAtna the state capital. These young men have set out to become primary school teachers, and are dedicating 2 years of their lives without earning, and this is very hard for them to do, in order to becoem a primary school teacher@6000 per month after two years of non-earning. Bright, tired, dispirited, yearning.
         
        As I launched on the description of historical conceptions of childhood, one young man said, softly, afraid to give offence: Nalanda and Mohenjadaro have toys. I was gobsmacked to use a common expression. Being the 'Chief Guest' I warred with my instinct to bluff to prevail, chargined at being found wanting (try it with 300 hundred pairs of eyes watching specultively, curiously!), and furiously scanning all I know to address the question-not happening at the moment-one young man rescued me, saying they were artifacts-I greatfully nodded (even while my mind was saying NOT).
         
        After 15 minutes or so, I unearthed  a nugget from my memory-that 'toys'  was an English word. That pacchisi, pallanguzhi, bambaram(lattu) , kallu (7 stones tossed up game), paandi (hopscotch) were never defined as toys-these were things young and old played together with or in cohorts. Artifacts of these are defintiely there in Nalanda and Mohenjadaro.
         
        My take, the young men student teachers in Nalanda are far more capable of teaching the young than 'fancy pajama' me is! I don't think they need to be told that they are co-learners, they SO know it. Allwe need to do is to acknowledge, appreciate, and recognise their own knowlhow edge. If we don't children do nto have  a chance.
         
        About children. We were 8 of us and we went in teams of 2 to 6 districts (some of us did two districts in case you are wondering). I have heard of intellectual acuity-these children broke the charts. Smart as a whip I believe is  how our colonisers describe them. If there was a MENSA test on the children of Bihar, 40% would qualify-they would have to re-define MENSA! There was this 9 year old girl from the SC community holding forth to 50 children in an open ground (her teachers have gone on soem training or other). She begins in Hindi with 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10. then she goes, 1 and 1 gyaara, and so on till 100 (don't judge: this is how she saw it). Then she does the same in English. Then she does this one number in Hindi, next in English-just like that! Not one number out of place. Is it constructivism? You bet! It was her creation, no doubt about that. And atleast 30 of her enthusiastic followers believed her and made it THEIR knowledge (and enjoyed it too).
         
        I learnt that western conception is, it has to be fun first and then learners will accept it. Maybe so in their world. In Nalanda, first it has to make sense, then it has to have acceptance, then it becomes fun!
         
        So, what do some of my friends think about this?
         
        Now the systems part. dont you think it would be so wonderful for all children to be together and work out their abilities and negotiate it amongst themselves with  teachers whose minds are not filled with 'goos'? 
         
        I bet all I posess on the possibility that the young men (her teachers)  will reach out and find the knowledge they need to address sharp tykes like the 9 year old girl. Let us give her and her teacher a chance. The only time teachers become sullen dictators is when we trample on them. That said there will ofcourse have to be oversight-by her parents? and parents of all her classmates?
         
        Then let us see what becomes of who want to learn what? My guess is that all of us will be scrambling to meet what the children and teachers want to know! There is no dearth of questions, only answers!
         
        Janaki
         
         
         
        Nowhere in the world would such intelligence be wasted as we do in India.
         
         
         
         
           

        On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 1:42 PM, yash pal <palyash.pal@...> wrote:
         
        Dear Janaki,

        I occasionally go through the discussion in which you are centrally involved. I feel that few of your friends are concerned with the fact that education is seldom given - in reality it is acquired. When that happens the so called educator transforms from being a courier agent to an educator cum co-learner. If this view is taken there might not be a uniform discipline based teaching. I cannot expand on it now but let us talk about it some time. In spite of being shocked we would find that discipline based division of knowledge has had a tragic consequence. for natural knowledge dissemination and creativity.

        yash pal


        On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...> wrote:
         

        Thanks George! He must lead the curriculum framework and science education for children with sight disabilities. Please share his mail address, so that we can get a group started.
         
        Janaki

        On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:45 AM, George Abraham <george@...> wrote:
         

        Deonar School for the blind, Hyderabad  have a wonderful way of teaching science to people who cannot see. It is the handy work of a passionate science teacher who took it upon himself to break the communication barrier to transfer scientific concepts without having to use visual aids. There is a message for all educators here!

         

        From: arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com [mailto:arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Satish Jha
        Sent: 11 February 2013 11:23
        To: arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com


        Subject: Re: [Arkitect India]: Common School System


         

         

        Anil is a pioneer. His idealism is unshakable. His passion for science education is exceptional. And all that said, I believe that his ideas do not help children learn the way they need to. I am sure he has his belief that he may have addressed most of the questions. That said, I believe that none of the patchwork suggestions tried out in India in the past 65 years has managed to get to the bottom of the challenges and, as yet, none is capable of getting us out of the rot symbolised by 65 years of non-learning, rote education environment. We cannot have a million Anil Sadgopals. We need systems that can work with average teachers, little infrastructure, inadequate eco-systems and yet meet the challenge of being globally aware.

        On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Pankaj Jain <pjain2002@...> wrote:

         

        Dear All,

        I guess, we need to separate good people from good-bad ideas.

        While no body should doubt the commitment and dedication of people like Anil Sadgopal, a reasonable case can be made out that all his ideas are not good for Indian children's education.

        Given that Indian state is easy to be hijacked as the instrument of bureaucratic, political and other types of vested interests, giving it monopoly of children's education and future is highly dangerous. The common school system, supported by Anil ji and many others, gives monopoly of children's education to the state, which is not a good idea.

        Anyway, till mid-1990s, whole of rural India had only common school system as envisaged by Anil ji, and it did not do much good. As regards equity, there are other equally effective ways to achieve that, without giving monopoly power to the State.

        So my appeal is to separate good people from good-bad idea, and deal with people and ideas independently of each other.

        Pankaj


         

        --- On Tue, 2/5/13, Kavita Krishnan <kavitakrish73@...> wrote:


        From: Kavita Krishnan <kavitakrish73@...>
        Subject: Re: [Arkitect India]
        To: arkitectindia@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Tuesday, February 5, 2013, 5:01 PM

         

        Anil Sadgopal.... of course...

        On 3 February 2013 02:04, Janaki Rajan <rajan.janaki@...> wrote:

         

        Hi,

        Have been following the progress(?) in the states on RTE. Its a no go.
        There is no way the government is going that will beacon for children.
        And it is not going to be different with any other government. Have
        seen all the players in action and have come to the conclusion that
        there is only one whose person's vision and roadmap which can make
        our children's future bright. That person has been taken for a ride,
        been denigrated too often-whay should he care? We should care though.
        His chapter on the Bihar Common School Commission should be enough for
        those who really care for the future of our children-read it
        carefully. He is in his seventies already. His photographic memory,
        awesome intellect, passion and commitment that is on the top 0.01% of
        the intellect of this world [aks Cal Tech!] is rotting because he has
        chosen to work in and for India where one listens or lesser minds
        listen onyl to denigrate. If there is nothing any of us will ever do
        in our lives, it will be ok, if we can get this gift to India to feel
        honoured and respected and provide space for him to sketch and pen a
        road map for the future of India's children. We, individuals, interest
        groups, officers, political people may not need him, but the children
        of India need him. Can we sink our egos and self interests to do this?
        Because if we do not, the children will never forgive us. i dont think
        I need to name this person.

        Janaki



         

        --
        Satish Jha
        Chairman,
        OLPC India Foundation
        Wellesley, MA 02482
        T: 301 841 7422
        F:301560 4909
        www.olpcindia.net
        http://twitter.com/olpcindia
        ________________
         








        --
        Yash Pal






      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.