Constraints in effective Indian Pedagogy

These days, talking about pedagogy, we at Academy seem to be extremely concerned about motivating the students to take initiatives to learn and grow on their own. We realized that it is far more difficult than any other college abroad, or for that matter even other colleges in the city to understand the student groups in Academy. Being a 60 year old institution, rooted in marathi blood, affiliated to the government and owing to its popularity, the Institution attracts a large number of people from different strata of the society. The multitude of students coming into the college can not be dealt with flatly. There are cultural, caste, class and educational differences between students. Some have problems in language, others have problems with understanding, some have landed up in the field because they could not enroll in any other course of their choice. There are issues of affordability, compulsions, reservations and a host of other legal issues. This forms the mixed student group in a class. How do you deliver a lecture to a class which is so disparate at intellectual levels and skill set?

We can not select students we would like to work with since we have to accept the students based on a merit rank calculated on the basis of an average of 12th std marks and a drawing test. These generalized standards do not necessarily profile the student we wish to work with at Academy. How are we to then tackle issues of interest levels on one hand and producing better professionals or thinkers on the other? In colleges abroad, the student community is grossly flat. They all speak English and are taught in English, so the basic level of understanding is quite high. On the other hand, since students are well trained in humanities, they take their own decisions (which over here, are guided by parents, on the basis of generalized career prospects). Thus, most people are able to figure out their interests and also pursue them as they wish to. There are large biases and stigmas associated with certain professions here. Amongst these complexities, what does one make out of the students or even the education system here?

We are dealing with lots of layers of complexities. At many autonomous institutions, which are able to decide upon the kind of students they wish to work with, along with the kind of course they want to teach, a lot of this complexity can be avoided. We at Academy have to not only follow the orthodox prescriptions of the Mumbai University, but also deal with the students sent over the by the University. This is not to undermine the students' potential or to show them down, but to make them aware that there is only this much that an Institution can do. It is largely for students to make a career successful for themselves.

A course like architecture becomes even more tricky because there is no one answer to any question. There is no one solution to a problem, and that things can be interpreted in so many ways. Thus, the framework that the university provides is redundant. The state of architecture in the country is low because Institutions and teachers have failed to update themselves regularly. Those who do update themselves unavoidably become "too different" to face criticism for not following the prescribed norms. In the bureaucracy of the system, the level of education becomes the least common denominator of the bare minimum and almost become a pitiful exercise of enabling students to pass by gaining minimum marks. 

All who return from their masters (from abroad or better institutions) want to teach! Many a times, people join teaching to assume the fashionable  position of the Intellect. But on other occasions, they also realize what is lacking in the education system, what they can contribute to it and therefore use the space of the academia to fulfil or perform experiments that they could not do during their time. All this, at the cost of the student's future. Some students gain, others manage ways out.

However, this debate needs serious thinking. Not only the teachers need to evaluate their positions, the students need to understand their goals and roles as students...Students can push their teachers to perform. This is not to say that they themselves must become their own teachers. Teachers have to be seen as facilitators for students' ideas. But teachers must collaborate with students to find new directions to venture into. For this, the student community has to not only forget this layered division amongst themselves but also realize to respect their own social positions and operate accordingly. This could be possibly one way of raising the architectural standards (for that matter, educational standards) of a place like ours.