Text of the dissent note submitted by M.S.S. Pandian to the NCERT Committee on Textbooks, and a sample of the cartoons recommended for deletion by the committee.
It is hardly possible, in my considered opinion, to identify “educationally inappropriate material” in the textbooks under review, without taking into account the pedagogic intent and the pedagogical methods of these books.
First, in the light of the National Curriculum Framework 2005, the former Director of the NCERT, Prof. Krishna Kumar, notes in the foreword to each of these textbooks: “Treating the textbook as the sole basis of examination is one of the key reasons why other resources and sites of learning are ignored. Inculcating creativity and initiative is possible if we perceive and treat children as participants in learning, not as receivers of a fixed body of knowledge.”
In other words, the pedagogical intent of these textbooks is to treat learning as a series of creative and critical acts in interpretation, mediated both by the classroom and the wider world. For instance, in Democratic Politics – I: Textbook in Political Science for Class IX, the Advisors to these textbooks write, “…You may encounter many contentious themes during this tour. Our attempt here is not to hand over a definite opinion to the students but to enable them to think on their own.”
This is precisely why the textbooks under review, without being treated as self-standing and as the only source of knowledge and learning, encourage learners to read magazines such as Frontline, India Today, Outlook and The Week (see Contemporary World Politics: Textbook in Political Science for Class XII), consult online sources (Democratic Politics – I: Textbook in Political Science for Class IX), read newspapers and collect different types of information (Democratic Politics – I: Textbook in Political Science for Class IX).
Again, the visual material in the books — postal stamps, photographs, advertisements, cartoons, etc. — are selected and arranged in such a manner that these textbooks do not “hand over a definite opinion to the students but to enable them to think on their own.” Referring to this particular role of the visuals in the textbooks Democratic Politics – I: Textbook in Political Science for Class IX, for instance, notes, “Munni and Unni are two characters specially designed for the book by cartoonist Irfan Khan. The two of them keep appearing every now and then to ask all kinds of questions: impish, irrelevant, irreverent or even impossible. The questions are sparked off by the points made in the text. But in most cases you will not find the answer in the textbook itself… They give the space to take a detour and get into a side discussion that is often richer than the main one…”
In other words, the visual materials in the textbooks do not merely illustrate the text, but engage with it in a critical dialogue, opening up spaces for the learners to enquire, question, and interpret. Given this pedagogical method, the text and the visuals in these books cannot work independent of each other. In a manner of speaking, only in the mutuality of the text and the visuals, do these textbooks realise their pedagogical intent. Doing them apart will be pedagogically deleterious. Let me add here, the visuals do not spare even the textbook writers. In Indian Constitution at Work: Textbook in Political Science for Class XI, Irfan Khan’s Unni poses, ‘Am I just a figurehead or am I asking real questions? Did the textbook writers give me power to ask questions I wish to ask or am I asking questions they have in their mind?’
Finally, the National Curriculum Framework 2005 also places emphasis on “values enshrined in the Constitution of India” as one of the foundational principles of school-level pedagogy. The textbooks consciously and splendidly capture these values. Let me offer two instances from Democratic Politics – I: Textbook in Political Science for Class IX. It offers learners the following set of reasons justifying democracy as a political system: “Democratic government is a better government because it is a more accountable form of government.”; “…democracy improves the quality of decision making.”; “Democracy provides a method to deal with differences and conflicts.”; “Democracy enhances the dignity of citizens.”; “…democracy is better than other forms of government because it allows us to correct its own mistakes.” All these statements are highlighted in the book by employing bold typefaces.
What is more, one of the exercises given to the learners asks them to do the following: “Form different groups in your class and collect different types of information (news clippings, articles, photographs, cartoons, etc.) about the struggle for democracy in any country that is currently not democratic.”
Yet, it is common knowledge that politics on the ground strays away often from “values enshrined in the Constitution of India.” In the spirit of upholding these values, the books invite the learners — often by means of political cartoons — to reflect seriously on these real-life deviations in politics.
Against this backdrop of the pedagogical intent and method of these textbooks — which are indeed imaginative exercises in critical pedagogy — I read all the textbooks with care, and from my own location as a teacher, as a parent, and as someone who has a steadfast commitment to certain kind of transformative politics. While reading these textbooks, I did take into account the suggestions by subject experts and the concerns expressed by political parties, educational and other NGOs, and public intellectuals. After the rewarding exercise of reading them, I do not find — let me confess, contrary to my expectation — anything educationally inappropriate in them; and they should be used as they are.
This, however, does not mean, these textbooks are forever. Like everything else — be it life, society or political icons — these books will court redundancy over time. In my judgment, that time is not yet. After all, what is often being perceived as ‘politically incorrect’ need not be ‘educationally inappropriate’.
(M.S.S. Pandian is Professor of History, Centre for Historical Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University New Delhi. He was a member of the NCERT Committee for Reviewing the Textbooks of Social Science/Political Science.)
Keywords: NCERT textbooks, cartoon controversy
Can I ask an off-tangent question? What about exams? Do children get more marks if they draw cartoons in the answers?
The first line is absolutely correct."Educationally inappropriate" is
not the right word. When such political critique cartoons appear in
all the Indian newspapers of all languages everyday, what wrong is it
to include the likes of them in a text-book? The first thing I
personally do while reading any newspaper is to look at the cartoon on
the first page which prods me on to read more about the relevant
matter.
If just the smell of the cartoons can trigger such a big controversy,
think of how much critical discussion and fruitful debate it can
initiate among the readers?
Political science is not a field where you can get away by just
stating the hard and fast facts/laws and it should be open to
opinions, discussions and dissents.
Such factions of known political celebrities are always there to
prevent the big names being tainted in any way, and to picturise them
in a god like manner by hook or crook and should not be taken
seriously as they are much skewed from reality
Mr. Pandian is spot-on when he says, "..Inculcating creativity and initiative is possible if we perceive and treat children as participants in learning, not as receivers of a fixed body of knowledge” and‘politically incorrect’ need not be ‘educationally inappropriate.’ Even though his dissent is the lone voice of the expert committee it is commendable for its integrity and balance which perhaps is the hall mark of a good pedagogue!
Like most other children in school, i avoided political science as a
subject. To me, is was something too intellectual, too idealistic and
somewhat a humbug, that had no relevance in real India. But in class
IX, the NCERT textbooks opened my eyes. The cartoons and the open-
ended questions led to discussions and debates, and learning became an
enjoyable process. We were asked to question, crticize, and reason as
opposed to the earlier approach of rote learning. The books, with the
cartoons as the main draw for me whetted my appetite for learning more
than anything else. Therefore, it deeply saddens me that politicians
in our country do not think that Indians are capable of independent,
rational and critical thought, which is why they feel a need to
montitor and censor educational material beyond what can be called a
reasonable measure.
What will happen if the Thorat Committee were asked to peruse the Constitution of India and make suggestions for removing all "inappropriate material" in it!
There were many instances while reading NCERT books at age of 23-24,I felt like they are creatively designed and very very enjoyable all the way.It was not so when I studied IX in a village school in Andhra Pradesh,we hardly knew anything about politics except that are bad and fully occupied with money power. Our ideas of Democracy ,Diversity, Unity in Diversity were very vague and not clear. Not even teachers are well equipped in those matters , let alone the text books of State Government. They are quite gloomy,full of dates and political jargon, there were no interactive stories in those text. After reading these NCERT books in Post Graduation I felt like if I had read them in my ninth standard I would have been in the field of Social Studies, but unfortunately choice was made with insufficient knowledge I got from my education.
I am very very thankful to NCERT team for designing such wonderful materials.They are full of questions that create so much interest in country and society.
Amidst speculations about the final decision of the Thorat
committee,Pro.Pandian's article vividly points out the basic
'misrepresented notion' of perception of ‘politically incorrect’ need
not be ‘educationally inappropriate’.I passed out from class 12th a year
back and I strongly feel that these unnecessary controversies are
curtailing 'the very palpable basics' on which the formulation of NCERT
is carved.
Pro.Pandian has objectively evaluated the cartoon issue and I offer my salutations to him On this issue. Low of England and Cartoonists like Shankar , lakshman, Surendran and Others did make us think on the contents of the cartoons and encouraged the creativity of The cartoon fans. The previous Expert committee with good intentions included cartoons in this background to foster the mental growth of the rising young generation in India. The Thorat committee has unknowingly recommended deletion of valuable cartoons, and this will only dampen creativity.Pro Yaspal has justified his position as the former Chairman of the expert committee and one hopes , the present government will not commit Injustice to the noble souls of Jawaharlal Nehru and Late Shankar , to enable the present
Generation to think about the past , and enable them to offer their expertise on the future.
There is no ultimate truth ,all are subjected to healthy criticism. As India is a democratic country all individuals have the right to agree and disagree with any kind of views.Critical thinking should be promoted in all means on all kinds of institutions as it is the main pedagogic objective of education.Education does not mean mere imparting of text book knowledge.Text book is only one among various sources.So it is favorable to include all kinds of items like cartoons to inculcate critical thinking among the pupils.
Now that politicians have decided to alter our textbooks as and when they feel offended, the process of creating an inquisitive student and a conscious society has derailed. Everybody knows what these (corrupt) politicians have done to our country. We just cannot let them poke their way out to our books. Textbooks are like mirrors, they show what happens in the society. But our so called leaders are hell bent on making it a painter, asking it to paint a utopian society. They cannot dictate what we want to read. Yes in democracy one has a right to raise objections but if the same trend continues, we are going to have books without words, knowledge without wisdom. The process of learning has to perennial without any impediment. Let "WE" , the students decide what comes under the category of being "OFFENDED".
I agree with the author completely. Having gone through the 11th and
12th standard NCERT books in question, I find them to be greatly
enlightening and appealing. They do aim at creating a generation of
innovative, assertive, creative and thinking students; rather than a
bunch of children whose natural appetite for knowledge and desire to
question is quelled by the "politically correct" rendition of facts in
an uninspired manner. I hope they will leave these books as is, and
don't try to control the thought process of children by randomly
removing cartoons that politicians object to for short-term gains.
A convincing article. The cartoons are part of the message and
are not meant to be seen and understood in isolation. For
example, the cartoon that was seen to be offensive to tamils was
part of a section on tamil regionalism. If that cartoon is read
in isolation then some might take offence. However, if one sees
the cartoon in the context of the overall text, the conclusion is unmistakable: tamil regionalism is actually applauded and
epitomized as an example where strong regionalism is a strength
to our nation. But, of course, for our politicians to understand
all this they need to be educated in political science and I
suppose that's too much to demand of them.
Three important things need to be considered while taking a call on matters pertaining to yesteryears.
1. Context: We all know what is true to A may not true to B; what is true A today, may not be true to A tomorrow / yesterday and what is true to A at home may not be true to him at Office. What might appear quite right to Nehru may not be right for many others.
2. Illustration: A graphic teaches more than what words do, is an accepted norm in pedagogy. What you represent in a graphic stays in a child's mind much more deeply than 100s of words. I still remember my chemistry teacher's example for weak and strong bonds, the boondi and the laddu.
3. Learning Mind: It is said and proven that children learn 'unsaid lines' more than 'said lines'. What you do is the one that your child does and not what you say.
Very well said...
It is so hard not to fall asleep whilst reading the excerpt from the NCERT textbook.
To make it interesting, they should have a format like the "Head First" book series where the authors have taken interest in making sure that the reader actually enjoys reading their text!
"The bottom line is" (as journalists' cliché goes) that nobody's opinion, including that of schoolchildren is substantially influenced by a single article or essay in a textbook or elsewhere. Textbooks are meant to teach FACTS, and as long as they do that, there should be no criticism or political interference. The textbook that precipitated this UNNECESSARY controversy teaches facts, rather well and quite enjoyably, in my opinion.
Politicians,please keep off from education.let it be a learning process and not a training camp for party freshers.
Please Email the Editor