Friends, In the second half of April 2012 and till the 1st May 2012, the IGNOU students protested at the prospects of closure of the face to face programmes of the university.Starting with two massive demonstrations going on to an indefinite hunger strike which was called off and converted in to a relay hunger strike, the protest ended with a peaceful court arrest.The face to face programmes on campus had been started by the previous vice chancellor but the current acting vice chancellor had told the students and the press that these face to face programmes were unconstitutional and would be closed.The vice chancellor had also set up a 'high power committee to review IGNOU's mandate' whose interim report recommending the suspension of these programmes had been deferred by the academic council.These events started a lively debate on the question of face to face programmes on an Open and Distance learning university campus.The more orthodox opinion in the university rejected the idea of a face to face programme in the university saying that it was not was not within IGNOU's 'mandate' to launch such programmes.Indeed the term 'mandate' was also used to designate the brief of the 'high power' committee set up by the vice chancellor.However even amongst the orthodox practitioners and scholars of Open and Distance learning, opinions are divided. Hilary Perraton, an eminent practitioner of Open and Distance learning argued recently in a book that part of the revenues earned in the fees of distance teaching universities can be ploughed back in to face to face teaching.Graville Rumble (an old distance education hand) argued in the U. K. Open University journal 'Open Learning'(1992,7,2) that dual mode universities( offering both face to face and distance education programmes) tend to be more flexible and cost effective.The main concern here was the rigidities of outlook and functioning which had come in to the Open and Distance teaching universities which some of the scholars argued were tending towards 'closure' rather than openness.(These included the first open University that is the United Kingdom Open University).The debate in IGNOU at the same time also focused on off campus face to face programmes offered in institutions under the public private scheme of IGNOU to highlight whether these were 'teaching shops' and whether they would contribute to the rigidities of the University.
The arguments also turned towards the Indian Parliament Act of 1985 which had established the IGNOU.It was argued that this Act of 1985 would have to be amended for IGNOU to offer face to face programmes and that IGNOU did not have the 'mandate' to launch such programmes. However we did point out that the IGNOU Act of 1985 does not use the term 'mandate' to describe the objectives of IGNOU. Rather it used the terms 'encouragement and promotion of Open and Distance learning within the educational pattern of the country'(See the opening statement of the Act). For this the clause 4 of the Act advocates 'a diversity of means including the use of any communication technology'.We had recently argued this point in a paper to the Search Committee headed by the eminent scientist Kasturirangan constituted to search for a new V.C. of the university.We also argued here that scholars and practitioners like Terry Evans and Daryl Nation while researching in to Open and Distance learning systems and Universities have been arguing for developing forms of synergy between face to face and distance teaching/learning practices in the context of late modernity (with which we seem to be integrating under the current phase of globalisation).This does not take us back in to the rigidities of the Conventional education systems but takes us towards building new relationships and forms of Open learning.For this we argued there was no need to change the Act of 1985 but there was a need to recognize the changing times we live in. The Act itself provides for sufficient diversity of practices.Recently talking to Prof. Santosh Panda, a member of this 'high power mandate' committee and an eminent educationist, we found that even he holds that under the Act of 1985 the IGNOU teachers reserve the option of teaching face to face programmes.Addressing the question of rigidity also becomes important in the context of the fact that the use of the term 'mandate' of the university comes from the way old universities of France and Germany were established in the medieval times by the then Popes.Indeed 'mandate' of the Pope was given to prescribe which subjects could be taught or could not be taught in these universities and the way these could be taught.Indeed George Brodrick in his histories of Cambridge and Oxford Universities(1894) brings out some of these themes.(Moreover even here at the highest level there was a concept of a dialogue between the King and the Pope before establishment of these universities as some scholars bring out.).The IGNOU Act on the other hand has come from a parliamentary process of debate and dialogue.Importantly the Indian Parliament itself is the outcome of a modern and broad based freedom struggle, indeed one of the greatest democratic and non violent movements of the 20th century.It is in this movement there were struggles for freedom of speech and expression which later on became a part of our constitution.It is this background we must keep in mind while looking at IGNOU Act which in any case does not even mention the concept of 'mandate'. Indeed the IGNOU Act in its clause 7 does away with any imposition of religion(implied in the term mandate used in the context of universities, esp. European Universities) on its students,teachers, academic staff or other staff while making a positive provision for women and weaker sections of the society. This is far removed from the patriarchal and religious concerns of heretical subjects being taught at the European Universities established by the religious concerns of the mandate or fiat of the Popes in medieval times.
Indeed in the light of freedom of speech and expression upheld by our constitution,parliament and our freedom struggle and such struggles since then enable us to understand the diversity of teaching learning processes which the IGNOU Act of 1985 upholds.That concept of diversity is extended also to teaching/learning in technology.(This is an important area since it is here that philosophers like Sartre pointed out that in technological work even during the period of semi-automatic machines men and women responded differently while being placed in analogous technological work.[see his Critique of Dialectical Reason, Vol.1] It is here that we need to take care that the technologically mediated teaching/learning does not succumb to viciousness of identity politics which dominates today and due regard is given to freedoms of speech and expression and other fundamental freedoms.We are referring here to the what Herbert Marcuse points out as 'struggles of existence' which break out in the context of a technology driven post industrial society of late modernity.In his book the 'One Dimensional Man' he points out how 'competing or differing needs,aspirations and desires are organised by vested interests in domination and scarcity' which moves this society towards violence and war. This is achieved by a fierce identity politics which imposes stereotypes of men, women,communities, race, creed etc.(We saw one example in the racist attacks on Indian students in Australia).
It is here the struggle for openness away from rigidity in the open and distance education becomes important.Desmond Keegan has pointed out how important it was for Open and Distance learning to get out of stereotypes of race, caste, gender, religion etc.(See his Foundations of Distance Education). It was precisely for this purpose that a critique of the conventional classroom teaching was developed by early open and distance educators.It is precisely here the debates on synergy between classroom and distance teaching become important to combat the radical stereotyping of gender, creed, caste etc. imposed on us in the post industrial/late modernity context.
We feel that the IGNOU students protest highlighted a struggle and search for openness in a context where a radical stereotyping of distance education was going on through high power committee etc.That they were joined by students of Jamia, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi University and other students through social media perhaps highlights this search for openness in education. Of course they have to take care that in the process they do not promote further rigidities through what are being called 'teaching shops' The protest was peaceful and the VC to his credit did constitute a teachers committee to dialogue with the students which also brought a split teachers association representatives for the purpose of talks. We hope this will continue.The sound and fury of the last day of the protest when the police was called in because the students were blocking passage however masked a desire for a non violent expansion of democratic space in the university. A few strident notes were struck but the students realised that no student movement can succeed by turning anti-teacher or indeed anti other constituents of the university. They were back on dialogue table after a peaceful court arrest and the VC gave them the assurance that he would do his best to look after their interest, the ongoing dharna and relay hunger strike was called off on the 1st May 2012. We hope that this search for openness along with massive participation of our distance education students in the recent 'Save the Forests' campaign with the Greenpeace (where on campus students too participated) will move towards what Herbert Macuse called an alternative of 'pacification of existence' in the wake of fierce identity politics and violence in the context of late modernity.We then could really move towards new forms of open learning.(SFC, PG IGNOU with the help of Mr. Ajay Mahurkar and Dr. Dolly Mathew)
The arguments also turned towards the Indian Parliament Act of 1985 which had established the IGNOU.It was argued that this Act of 1985 would have to be amended for IGNOU to offer face to face programmes and that IGNOU did not have the 'mandate' to launch such programmes. However we did point out that the IGNOU Act of 1985 does not use the term 'mandate' to describe the objectives of IGNOU. Rather it used the terms 'encouragement and promotion of Open and Distance learning within the educational pattern of the country'(See the opening statement of the Act). For this the clause 4 of the Act advocates 'a diversity of means including the use of any communication technology'.We had recently argued this point in a paper to the Search Committee headed by the eminent scientist Kasturirangan constituted to search for a new V.C. of the university.We also argued here that scholars and practitioners like Terry Evans and Daryl Nation while researching in to Open and Distance learning systems and Universities have been arguing for developing forms of synergy between face to face and distance teaching/learning practices in the context of late modernity (with which we seem to be integrating under the current phase of globalisation).This does not take us back in to the rigidities of the Conventional education systems but takes us towards building new relationships and forms of Open learning.For this we argued there was no need to change the Act of 1985 but there was a need to recognize the changing times we live in. The Act itself provides for sufficient diversity of practices.Recently talking to Prof. Santosh Panda, a member of this 'high power mandate' committee and an eminent educationist, we found that even he holds that under the Act of 1985 the IGNOU teachers reserve the option of teaching face to face programmes.Addressing the question of rigidity also becomes important in the context of the fact that the use of the term 'mandate' of the university comes from the way old universities of France and Germany were established in the medieval times by the then Popes.Indeed 'mandate' of the Pope was given to prescribe which subjects could be taught or could not be taught in these universities and the way these could be taught.Indeed George Brodrick in his histories of Cambridge and Oxford Universities(1894) brings out some of these themes.(Moreover even here at the highest level there was a concept of a dialogue between the King and the Pope before establishment of these universities as some scholars bring out.).The IGNOU Act on the other hand has come from a parliamentary process of debate and dialogue.Importantly the Indian Parliament itself is the outcome of a modern and broad based freedom struggle, indeed one of the greatest democratic and non violent movements of the 20th century.It is in this movement there were struggles for freedom of speech and expression which later on became a part of our constitution.It is this background we must keep in mind while looking at IGNOU Act which in any case does not even mention the concept of 'mandate'. Indeed the IGNOU Act in its clause 7 does away with any imposition of religion(implied in the term mandate used in the context of universities, esp. European Universities) on its students,teachers, academic staff or other staff while making a positive provision for women and weaker sections of the society. This is far removed from the patriarchal and religious concerns of heretical subjects being taught at the European Universities established by the religious concerns of the mandate or fiat of the Popes in medieval times.
Indeed in the light of freedom of speech and expression upheld by our constitution,parliament and our freedom struggle and such struggles since then enable us to understand the diversity of teaching learning processes which the IGNOU Act of 1985 upholds.That concept of diversity is extended also to teaching/learning in technology.(This is an important area since it is here that philosophers like Sartre pointed out that in technological work even during the period of semi-automatic machines men and women responded differently while being placed in analogous technological work.[see his Critique of Dialectical Reason, Vol.1] It is here that we need to take care that the technologically mediated teaching/learning does not succumb to viciousness of identity politics which dominates today and due regard is given to freedoms of speech and expression and other fundamental freedoms.We are referring here to the what Herbert Marcuse points out as 'struggles of existence' which break out in the context of a technology driven post industrial society of late modernity.In his book the 'One Dimensional Man' he points out how 'competing or differing needs,aspirations and desires are organised by vested interests in domination and scarcity' which moves this society towards violence and war. This is achieved by a fierce identity politics which imposes stereotypes of men, women,communities, race, creed etc.(We saw one example in the racist attacks on Indian students in Australia).
It is here the struggle for openness away from rigidity in the open and distance education becomes important.Desmond Keegan has pointed out how important it was for Open and Distance learning to get out of stereotypes of race, caste, gender, religion etc.(See his Foundations of Distance Education). It was precisely for this purpose that a critique of the conventional classroom teaching was developed by early open and distance educators.It is precisely here the debates on synergy between classroom and distance teaching become important to combat the radical stereotyping of gender, creed, caste etc. imposed on us in the post industrial/late modernity context.
We feel that the IGNOU students protest highlighted a struggle and search for openness in a context where a radical stereotyping of distance education was going on through high power committee etc.That they were joined by students of Jamia, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi University and other students through social media perhaps highlights this search for openness in education. Of course they have to take care that in the process they do not promote further rigidities through what are being called 'teaching shops' The protest was peaceful and the VC to his credit did constitute a teachers committee to dialogue with the students which also brought a split teachers association representatives for the purpose of talks. We hope this will continue.The sound and fury of the last day of the protest when the police was called in because the students were blocking passage however masked a desire for a non violent expansion of democratic space in the university. A few strident notes were struck but the students realised that no student movement can succeed by turning anti-teacher or indeed anti other constituents of the university. They were back on dialogue table after a peaceful court arrest and the VC gave them the assurance that he would do his best to look after their interest, the ongoing dharna and relay hunger strike was called off on the 1st May 2012. We hope that this search for openness along with massive participation of our distance education students in the recent 'Save the Forests' campaign with the Greenpeace (where on campus students too participated) will move towards what Herbert Macuse called an alternative of 'pacification of existence' in the wake of fierce identity politics and violence in the context of late modernity.We then could really move towards new forms of open learning.(SFC, PG IGNOU with the help of Mr. Ajay Mahurkar and Dr. Dolly Mathew)
