Things that the critics of commercialization of education forget...
The coaching centres of Hyderabad are a favourite pet-hate of many at IIT Madras.
A many that comprises of those that consider themselves lucky enough to not have gone through what they apparently believe to be a gruelling grind that is best avoided and a large number of those who have formed their perception on what they hear from the former.
There is some merit to that argument from an individual viewpoint.
Some, however, among whom are a few narrow minded professors, naive undergrads and surprisingly enough students who have directly benefited from it, remain mindless critics of a system that they view as now being crassly commercialized.
They couldn't be more wrong if social justice was a criterion.
All that is needed is a rough comparison at the social composition of students who come from Andhra to that from other parts of India. And it is only a miniscule fraction in the reserved category of seats that is not taken by students from Andhra, at all the IITs.
It doesn't need an indepth analysis to conclude that Tamil Nadu and Karnataka's contribution to IIT Madras is largely if not entirely Brahmin, mostly from big cities and towns and that from the North, (ignoring those who decided to put themselves through the 'crassly commercialized controls' of Kota, as against the more 'refined' version apparently available in Chennai), is but an upper middle class contribution from Delhi, Mumbai and a few other big cities, largely comprised of traders and brahmins, with a few dominant landowning castes thrown here and there.
There are clearly more opportunities as the son/daughter of a small farmer/ businessman in towns such as Tenali, Atmakur, Miryalguda than in places such as Sivakasi, Balasore or Hubli it would seem. And the single biggest contributors for this phenomenon have been the much loathed coaching centres, Ramaiah, Special, Chaitanya et al.
By taking coaching for the JEE into places no one has taken before - into the small towns and villages, these institutes have provided access to sufficient quality education to anybody as long as they could pay. And a fierce competition for finding the smartest minds has meant that you only have to do well in your grade 10 to get atleast a 50% waiver or more.
I would rather have a less 'well read, less informed rustics' from rural Andhra or Tamil Nadu filling up the seats here than just well-read people from the same school in the same city every yera from the same community.
Arguments that these people contribute little to life at IITM in the four years have no weight, for their entry serves a greater purpose in the longer run than so-called well read,talented people into a system that might otherwise degenerate into catering to the elite of the big cities alone.
If Nehru wanted a system, that brings people from every corner of the country into the IITs, aren't the coaching centres helping?
But the biggest plus on their report cards is an awareness of the opportunity, among the middle income groups of the 'underprivileged' classes - And to their credit alone, more seats in the reserved category are filled by students from Andhra than anywhere else.
Just as more Brahmins at IIT Madras from Tamil Nadu and Karnataka doesn't mean they are smarter than people from other communities in those two states, more people from the underprivileged classes of Andhra doesn't mean they are smarter than their counterparts elsewhere in the country.
It simply raises uncomfortable questions about social justice mechanisms all over the country. ( ie government enforced ones, the free market mechanism for accessible education in Andhra, only for entrance exams however:), is of course entirely a credit to these private institutions)
This must answer any questions that a narrow minded professor (who can't get his class to pay enough attention to his teaching and would resort to a methodical demoralization of a large number of 18 year olds comparing them to products from a factory that is run by an old man called Ramaiah and his team located in but a single house in Padmarao nagar in Hyderabad, little of course does he know that it would take him, from his current pathetic level, perhaps a lifetime to teach like them) would pose or other equally naive undergrads, who take his words as the truth.
However, if you indeed spent two years or less at that house in Padmarao nagar, and are still a critic, all that I can say is you probably suffered for the sake of something that benefited and still benefits a large number of people.
But it would be only a very unwise one, who would cast the blame of incompetence for the rest of his/her life, on two years spent under the strict guidance of an old man and his team, who it must be remembered only wanted to help.
So the next time, someone asks you anything uncomfortable about Ramaiah, Chaitanya, Special or the like, you have no reason to feel so uncomfortable.
A many that comprises of those that consider themselves lucky enough to not have gone through what they apparently believe to be a gruelling grind that is best avoided and a large number of those who have formed their perception on what they hear from the former.
There is some merit to that argument from an individual viewpoint.
Some, however, among whom are a few narrow minded professors, naive undergrads and surprisingly enough students who have directly benefited from it, remain mindless critics of a system that they view as now being crassly commercialized.
They couldn't be more wrong if social justice was a criterion.
All that is needed is a rough comparison at the social composition of students who come from Andhra to that from other parts of India. And it is only a miniscule fraction in the reserved category of seats that is not taken by students from Andhra, at all the IITs.
It doesn't need an indepth analysis to conclude that Tamil Nadu and Karnataka's contribution to IIT Madras is largely if not entirely Brahmin, mostly from big cities and towns and that from the North, (ignoring those who decided to put themselves through the 'crassly commercialized controls' of Kota, as against the more 'refined' version apparently available in Chennai), is but an upper middle class contribution from Delhi, Mumbai and a few other big cities, largely comprised of traders and brahmins, with a few dominant landowning castes thrown here and there.
There are clearly more opportunities as the son/daughter of a small farmer/ businessman in towns such as Tenali, Atmakur, Miryalguda than in places such as Sivakasi, Balasore or Hubli it would seem. And the single biggest contributors for this phenomenon have been the much loathed coaching centres, Ramaiah, Special, Chaitanya et al.
By taking coaching for the JEE into places no one has taken before - into the small towns and villages, these institutes have provided access to sufficient quality education to anybody as long as they could pay. And a fierce competition for finding the smartest minds has meant that you only have to do well in your grade 10 to get atleast a 50% waiver or more.
I would rather have a less 'well read, less informed rustics' from rural Andhra or Tamil Nadu filling up the seats here than just well-read people from the same school in the same city every yera from the same community.
Arguments that these people contribute little to life at IITM in the four years have no weight, for their entry serves a greater purpose in the longer run than so-called well read,talented people into a system that might otherwise degenerate into catering to the elite of the big cities alone.
If Nehru wanted a system, that brings people from every corner of the country into the IITs, aren't the coaching centres helping?
But the biggest plus on their report cards is an awareness of the opportunity, among the middle income groups of the 'underprivileged' classes - And to their credit alone, more seats in the reserved category are filled by students from Andhra than anywhere else.
Just as more Brahmins at IIT Madras from Tamil Nadu and Karnataka doesn't mean they are smarter than people from other communities in those two states, more people from the underprivileged classes of Andhra doesn't mean they are smarter than their counterparts elsewhere in the country.
It simply raises uncomfortable questions about social justice mechanisms all over the country. ( ie government enforced ones, the free market mechanism for accessible education in Andhra, only for entrance exams however:), is of course entirely a credit to these private institutions)
This must answer any questions that a narrow minded professor (who can't get his class to pay enough attention to his teaching and would resort to a methodical demoralization of a large number of 18 year olds comparing them to products from a factory that is run by an old man called Ramaiah and his team located in but a single house in Padmarao nagar in Hyderabad, little of course does he know that it would take him, from his current pathetic level, perhaps a lifetime to teach like them) would pose or other equally naive undergrads, who take his words as the truth.
However, if you indeed spent two years or less at that house in Padmarao nagar, and are still a critic, all that I can say is you probably suffered for the sake of something that benefited and still benefits a large number of people.
But it would be only a very unwise one, who would cast the blame of incompetence for the rest of his/her life, on two years spent under the strict guidance of an old man and his team, who it must be remembered only wanted to help.
So the next time, someone asks you anything uncomfortable about Ramaiah, Chaitanya, Special or the like, you have no reason to feel so uncomfortable.
posted by Mohanakrishna C at 9:45 PM
4 comments
