Education

For those of you who have been waiting with bated breath for my next post on the Bhagirathi valley, it will come. I am not done with the series and the next post is about Mukhba.
This is in the nature of a break from our scheduled programme. I need to tell you of a lecture I went to today. It was organized by the Latika Roy Foundation as part of their Distinguished Lecture Series on Education and Inclusion.

The lectures LRF organises are wonderfully thought-provoking. This time as well, the panel of speakers had a lot of exclamation and interrogation marks popping up in my head.

There was a space of time though, when I was also angry. This was during a discussion of the Sarv Shiksha Abhiyaan. The SSA (education for all) is the Government program to ensure that every child has access to education. I have already commented on their token efforts at ‘access’- ramps in district schools.

And so, when the speaker began talking of a concerted ‘micro-planning’ attempt at identifying children with special needs, I perked up and began paying attention. I shouldn’t have, because then he went on to say how ‘these children would be identified and placed in a special classroom’. Now it is possible that I did not catch all that the program entailed, and also expected that all of the plans cannot be fit into one-third of a slide. But that statement made a lot of warning bells go off in my head.

One assumes that by ‘these children’ he means all those that need to make more effort to live in this imperfectly designed world of ours. He means the visually impaired, the hearing impaired, those who have problems with mobility, those with cognitive problems, autistic children- all those who do not fit into the paper-cutout model that is so convenient for planners. So all these children, with their whole spectrum of needs are to be lumped into one class and taught together, presumably by a tired teacher on her punishment shift. And if this diverse bunch is to be grouped together, what is the common factor among them? Being ‘imperfect’? ‘Defective’? Is it only me, or does this logic have disturbing shades of that which led to an exercise of weeding out the imperfect that was carried out 65 years ago and scarred humanity forever?

Now as I said earlier, I might have heard wrong. I sincerely hope I did. I am also naturally pessimistic. Now Jo, determinedly sunny person that she is, is bound to have a different take on it. so do me a favour. Her blog, By Little and By Little,  is listed on my sidebar. Keep an eye on it for the next few days and for fairness’ sake please read her version of events.

But I am glad I stayed, because the next speakers were stellar. The chief speaker was informative, engaging and enthusiastic. The take-away from her talk was a set of three tools that you (thump!)can (thump!) do TOMORROW! The concepts that she spoke about though, had been covered in detail and with great passion by two earlier speakers who were introduced as (among other things) ‘Parents’.

Now I need to confess to bristling when I heard this. The thing is that far too often I have been the victim of benevolent panel-making. “This is the Exalted Grand Supreme Commander of XYZ, bow to him! And this is A Woman Engineer! Look at her pretty saree!’ In this case I was gloriously, gladly wrong.

These two were parents, and that lay at the heart of their expertise. They spoke with conviction, confidence, wisdom and energy of the core of inclusive education. ‘Special’ is not an euphemism, they said. Every child is special. Every child learns differently. Education is a fundamental right- for all children. The system is failing to deliver- for all children. We need to re-evaluate the goal of learning. They had learnt from life and from struggling to educate their children, and their body language showed it. I was educated, inspired, and after the SSA experience, reassured.

But the evening does not end there. While returning, I caught a Vikram. After picking me up, the driver did not continue on his route, but proceeded to lecture the other two passengers. They were students in their teens still wearing their uniforms, and were eating groundnuts. They had also thrown the shells where they sat, and that earned them the driver’s wrath. He spoke at some length about why not to litter, and ended bitterly with ‘ and you are studying at school! Why should I have to teach you these things?’ “Why not?” I thought “Educators, they are where we meet them.”

This is a much longer post than I normally write. But I returned a couple of hours ago outraged, excited, and bursting at the seams with thoughts. The LRF lectures do that to one.

being politically correct- or not

A few weeks ago, I sat in on a meeting with two other people I respect. We were talking about access to services, I believe, and one of them made a comment that included the term 'disabled'. He was instantly corrected- 'ah, you mean specially-abled'.

To this, he replied that no, he meant 'disabled'. He continued to explain that it is necessary to recognize and acknowledge the fact that there are some of us who find this world a little difficult to navigate and need some help to do so. It is only then that we can seriously apply our minds to making sure this help is available at the time and in the manner that it is desired. He said a lot more on the topic, and listening to him, I realized all over again why I respect him so.

Since then though, I have been thinking. And I can see the point of both arguments. Terms used to address someone who is a little different can easily be a form of abuse. Old government records and texts abound with references to cripples, idiots, negroes and shudras. Each of these terms if uttered in public today would earn the utterer a black eye- and rightly so. But other than that, have things changed?

Does the number of 'g's with which one spells 'African' matter as long as one does not discriminate when working/socializing/loving? How about the other way round? What I see these days is that people think that the only thing that matters is to use the politically correct term. Use the cumbersome 'he or she' as a pronoun, but only employ a woman as a receptionist. Say 'specially-abled' but retain thresholds in all your doorways.

This has led to people doing two things with equal passion: hunting out increasingly obtuse terms, and insisting that there is nothing demeaning about a spade being called a spade.

Me, I am not sure. I dont know what comes first- respect or a respectful term. What do you think?

I have mentioned before how my mum is fiercely holding on to her mobility. Well, we are planning on a day trip to Rishikesh this Sunday. Now it is possible to minimize walking there, but not eliminate it entirely.

And so, mum and I had a conversation that went something like this.

I (brightly): you know, lots of shops sell canes in Rishikesh. Why don’t you buy one?
She (puzzled): what?
I(miming holding a walking stick): a cane! To walk with!
She(expressing concern): for you? Your knee is paining?
I get message and shut up.

Am worried about her, but proud of her too.

Accessibility in India

I was thinking about the whole issue of making places accessible to those who are not very mobile. Maybe it is not perfect in any country, but India needs to pay more than lipservice to the whole accessibility issue. There are some steps being taken by the government, and there was a time when I was happy with it- thinking that it is a start, and can only get better. Now, I think of these measures as more of an insult than anything else.

A couple of years ago, there was a government decree that Panchayat schools be made accessible. On the ground, this was interpreted as building a ramp. The thresholds to the classrooms were not removed, the width of the verandah did not accommodate a turning radius, but a ramp was provided, and the conscience of the government was at rest. Technicalities aside, how many villagers in India can afford a wheelchair?

Delhi with my Mum: an accessibility primer

This weekend, I was in Delhi with my mum, and realised how difficult it is to be even moderately infirm in India. My mum is a senior citizen and not in the best of health. She is not confined to a wheelchair or to her home (thank all concerned gods/other paranormal entities/genes/pharmaceutical companies), and is holding on to that mobility with a fiercely proud grip. It is increasingly difficult for her to do it. I was travelling with her after a very long time, and realised how accessibility can be an issue in most cities in India.
Let us look at the positive aspects of it first, shall we?

1. A lot of public spaces being designed today (metro stations, Delhi Haat) have wheelchair access. These are well designed, with adequate turning space, and toilets.
2. The Metro has signs in Braille, and lifts in some stations.
3. India has a warm informal support system, where shopkeepers and strangers are willing to help people in need. This takes many forms, from giving up a seat in a train for an old lady, to allowing her to sit in one’s shop for a few minutes.
   

But now for the negative aspects.

1. It was difficult to find a quiet hotel with a room on the ground floor. In the end, I had to settle for a bed and breakfast with lift access, which was not ideal.We had to walk long distances for an auto-rickshaw, and very often we had to tailor our itinerary to transport constraints- auto rickshaws do not agree to travel short distances.
2. There are no safe and clean places to sit down and breathe in the middle of a stroll in a shopping area. You either need to grit your teeth and go on till you collapse, or settle down on the steps. This is not ideal either- apart from the cleanliness issues, it is difficult to get up from a low seat.
3. Indian Rail is perhaps the most inaccessible public amenity ever designed. I was there with my mum and three bags. This is not excessive luggage, and all we needed to do was get onto a train. But between climbing the overhead stairs, looking for the compartment, and negotiating the narrow passages, it was hell. You know I am biased towards Indian Rail, but its accessibility needs work. Wheelchairs are available, but what do I do with them on the stairs?

What would have helped?

1. Provide benches in market areas. I cannot emphasize enough how crucial this is. Being able to break the journey will make it possible. Providing a bench can also make the difference from ‘sitting down for a break’ and ‘collapsing of exhaustion’ for a senior citizen on a solitary jaunt. I have heard the strangest reasons for not providing these, one of them being that they will attract ‘anti-social elements’. I might be wrong, but i do believe that ASEs do not consider accessibility as one of the criteria when looking for places to haunt. And I will deal with them, thank you; I have a whole arsenal of looks-that-beseech and glares-that-intimidate at my disposal.
2. It should be mandatory to provide lifts at public transport hubs. The Metro does have them, but not at every point of exit, and they do not go to the ground level. I agree that there are volume issues with providing lifts at railway stations. They have the potential to be a bottleneck or in worst cases, a stampede catalyst. So limit access. Make it pay-per-use. I don’t care- I need an option that saves a senior citizen the necessity of climbing the overhead bridge.
3. Make pavements hassle-free. Delhi is trying. But we seem to have adopted the European custom of walking path- cyclist’s path- vehicles- buses. It does not work in India. Motorcyclists take over the cyclist’s path and the cyclists go onto the pedestrian area which is already occupied by hawkers, and the pedestrians give up and hail an auto-rickshaw. Cycle paths need to stay and be protected; far too many cyclists are killed. But this system needs to make space for street hawkers. There is nothing wrong with them- peddling things on the street is an important part of the economy and needs to be recognised as such. Create alcoves that are free to use for hawkers; make it impossible for scooterists to use the cycle paths. Walking should be a pleasure, not an extreme sport.

And surprisingly, I think that is all that is needed. Even the first two will be enough. But I think that the problem is not the lack of benches or lifts. The problem seems to be urban planning for automobiles and not for people. And how do we change that?