“Liberate the Liberal Arts:
Contrasting Kerala’s and United States’ Liberal Arts Colleges”

They (schools) create and reinforce patterns of social class, racial and sexual identification among students which allow them to relate ‘properly’ to their eventual standing in the hierarchy of authority and status in the production process. Schools foster types of personal development compatible with the relationships of dominance and subordinancy in the economic sphere.

Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis, Education in Capitalist America, 1976

Educational sociologists have argued that it is not content, but structure which forms the mind of a student. An education that glorifies authoritarian class environments, rote learning, and streamlined courses denies the growth of young people into analytical, creative, and well-rounded citizens. Limiting the next generation to an educational system bent on producing economically efficient human capital only capable of conforming to authoritarian institutions, such as the growing number of multinational corporations, is an injustice. It merely propels the already aggressive, self-interested societal mentality steadily emerging among the middle and upper classes in Kerala, India, and across the world. Moreover, it precipitates the oppression of the lower classes by injecting a conformist attitude that crushes any spirit of resistance.

In 1976, Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis wrote extensively about the situation of education in capitalist America. They found that while the higher education utilized a liberal arts structure, the primary and secondary level education remained under a strict and authoritarian configuration. Unfortunately, most higher education in Kerala ascribes to the latter. Instead of a holistic education, students’ knowledge is compartmentalized. Rather than critical thinking, rote learning is encouraged. Instead of being an active agent in the class, the student is treated as a vessel for collecting information. Finally, particular to the situation in Kerala, financial assets prove tantamount to intellectual merit. These facets of Kerala’s higher education result in workers trained to obey without questioning their source of income. The liberal arts oriented structure that fosters student dialogue, analytical thinking, and a wide range of course work from multiple subjects is essential in forming socially concerned human beings who endeavor to bring peace and justice to the world.

While the United States is considered the bastion of capitalistic ideology, the higher education system is one that increasingly values the liberal arts above focused business, medical, and engineering courses. Harvard and Stanford, the top-ranked universities in the world, require coursework in the subject areas of natural sciences, social sciences, mathematics, art, and language for all students. This leads to greater flexibility in choosing classes and a course of study; students can discover their unique strengths and explore where their passions lie. This is the first contrast with the education system in Kerala. Even in “liberal arts” education streams, students are limited to one course whose only digression is one or two language classes. This is a duplication of the “specialization of skills” which emerged with the age of capitalism. Bowles and Gintis assert, “The fragmented nature of jobs is reflected in the institutionalized and rarely constructive competition among students and in the specialization and compartmentalization of academic knowledge.” Furthermore, in Kerala, a central University dictates the curriculum within these already confined courses and regulates it by issuing exams once a year. Consequently, there is no flexibility for professors to experiment with curriculum, practical application, or alternative teaching strategies.

In theory, the University system is a democratic and unbiased means of evaluating students. However, under close scrutiny, the system is not only biased, but also debilitating for students, faculty, and the individual colleges. Because of the “standardized” curriculum and examinations required by the centralized University, great importance is given to test taking within the classroom. Time-consuming internal examinations as well as “model examinations” are conducted in order to prepare students for these University exams. This bolsters a motivational system based on “ . . . grades and other external rewards and the threat of failure rather than the intrinsic social benefits of the process of education (learning) or its tangible outcome (knowledge).” Furthermore, the tests’ format emphasizes rote learning, mere memorization of facts rather than critical thinking. Therefore, a students’ success is based on the ability to follow instructions, rather than question or challenge them. While this is a less detectable bias, an obvious flaw lies in the grading system; because individuals correct the exams, there exists an irrefutable tendency for incongruent scoring. Consequently, students who rank highly in classrooms may not perform accordingly in examinations.

As previously stated, the examinations also limit faculty to a specific curriculum, and the individual colleges to specific courses. Therefore, this evaluation system proves a burden from the institutional level to the student level. The emphasis on centralized standard testing constitutes the second contrast between the Keralite and the American liberal arts education. Liberal arts colleges in the United States have turned away from an emphasis on examinations and now stress essays, research, and long-term coursework. This form of evaluation gives students flexibility, practical experience, and encourages continual study rather than short-term memorization. Moreover, professors are not bound to a particular curriculum by centralized examinations. They are allowed almost free-reign in assigning coursework, which is all evaluated internally. Finally, colleges are managed as separate entities, granting them freedom to approve innovative syllabi and courses. They also remain unburdened by the inefficiency of indeterminate examination schedules and results caused by a centralized University.

In the past few years, there has also been a shift in the American liberal arts colleges to smaller class sizes, which fosters discussion between professors and students. Students are encouraged to give their comments and criticisms, as well as gain insights from other students. The intimate class setting also promotes less formal relationships between students and faculty; relationships based on respect rather than fear, which create a comfortable atmosphere for expression. However, most Indian classrooms have adhered to the traditional teaching method: the professor stands at the head of the class lecturing while students tediously take notes to later be memorized. Rarely are students given an opportunity for input, and any contradicting idea is easily usurped by the professor’s unquestioned omnipotence. The result is a young generation of complacent workers, whose primary function is to obey the authority, whether teacher, government official, or corporate employer.

Surprisingly, within the otherwise conservative structure of Kerala’s higher education system, a corporate mentality has seeped into many of its facets, including the admissions process. While government funded colleges are bound to admitting students based on merit and social standing, privatized and self-financing courses’ criteria are increasingly purely economical. Students are charged exorbitant amounts for their education, with no hope of scholarships, grants, or loans. There can be no other motivation for offering these courses than the possibility of financial success. However, the students of these programs are streamed directly into corporate careers, making the courses very enticing, especially for middle-class families trapped in the illusion that material wealth is the harbinger of happiness. This is a stark contrast to the concept of “need-blind” admissions adopted by the elite universities in America. Applications are considered strictly by merit, without consideration of the students’ financial status. These universities, some privately and some publicly funded, grant financial aid in accordance to a student’s need through scholarships, work-study programs, or student loans. Funding for these schools comes largely from endowments and alumni donations, not student tuition fees. Even in America, the country most censured for its capitalist and corporate system, quality education is considered a service that should be made available to all.

In the ever-increasing corporate world, the traditional education structure in Kerala’s institutions of higher learning becomes all the more frightening. Students at universities streamlined for employment in transnational corporations as engineers, technicians, and managers express little or no interest in the role they play in upholding institutions which inflict injustice and suffering upon others. Their education has dictated that life’s values are economical, and success means obeying the source of income. Unfortunately, a growing number of middle-class families driven by what has been termed “The American Dream,” are opting for this type of corporate streamed education for their children, and Kerala’s Universities have consequently invested in self-financing and off-campus courses. Even those institutions that originally offered liberal arts and sciences as main courses are now ignoring those streams that emphasize development of the entire person. Instead, they have turned their heads to the more lucrative courses that squeeze funding from students and their families.

Of course, the American educational system also contains flaws due to the circumstances of its own culture. Issues of race, class, and gender are continually being addressed and challenged by activists. While a number of the younger generation fight against the corporate self-seeking mentality, many Americans still uphold monetary success and prestige as the ultimate goals for an individual. Unfortunately, that outlook has infiltrated perforce into the collective conscience of Kerala. It is this mentality that perpetuates a streamlined, self-serving educational system now on the rise. The combination of traditional course structure and a new market mentality threatens the democracy so treasured by the state once deemed a “model for development through social reform.” Instead, young people need to be educated in ways that exceed basic memorization and regurgitation of facts. They should be taught to question, discuss, and challenge the world and its values. They should not be inhibited by course structure, inane examinations, or faculty authoritarianism. Despite what the Indian government dictates, students are not merely “human capital,” to be traded in the market. They are creative individuals with the ability to change the world, for better or worse, and education should lead them in the path to social enlightenment and advocacy, not ignorance and conformity.

“An Education in Subordination:
Gender Discrimination in Higher Learning Institutions”
By Elizabeth Chatelain

Imagine a place where individual human rights are not a priority. A bell dictates when to eat, to work, and to sleep. Leaving the gated compound is nearly impossible. An authority carefully reads communication with family members. Does this sound like a prison? No, this is a psychological and cultural incarceration; this is the higher education system for women in Kerala. While the number of females entering degree courses is increasing, women continue to experience under-representation and discrimination on campuses, especially in residential life. Furthermore, the number of women workers in Kerala remains negligible and has decreased in the last ten years. Statistics such as these suggest that though women are finding education, they are not gaining independence and equality. Instead, their college experience leads them down yet another road to subjugation by a patriarchal society.

While some institutions in Kerala prove more liberal than others, the general discriminatory attitude towards women remains consistent across the state. Under the guise of “safety issues,” young women in hostels are sometimes constrained to the extent of losing complete individual freedom. Often confined to the college campus or hostel, with the exception of one or two Saturdays per month, they follow diligently enforced time schedules for study, eating, and sleeping. Mobile phones are prohibited, and in some establishments, letters are opened and read by the college authority. Some institutions ban female students from sitting in areas of campus that could potentially facilitate coed relationships. These regulations are unfathomable for a population theoretically old enough to work, marry, and own property. Indeed, if these rules were enforced on young men, there would be uproar. But women are expected to accept them without resistance.

Not unlike the present situation for women throughout the world, those living in Kerala’s college hostels undoubtedly face a double standard. Men have later curfews, are allowed to leave the campus, and are less strictly regulated than the women. Mobile phones are allowed, and certainly no rules exist pertaining to where they can stand or sit. Again, women’s protection is considered justification for discriminatory regulations. But why are the alleged perpetrators of such dangers allowed freedom while the victims face the punishment? While the college authorities moralize on protecting girls from coed relationships, the verbal sexual harassment from male students on campus is still overwhelmingly tolerated. These double standards lead to feelings of subordination, worthlessness, and worst of all, unnecessary guilt. Serious psychological, social and cultural implications arise from this discrimination, which simultaneously reflects and bolsters the chauvinism found in India and throughout the world.

Kerala prides itself on having the highest literacy rate in the country, and the number of females in higher education is increasing. In spite of this, 84.7% of women in Kerala are classified as “non-workers.” In fact, while the amount of male workers has increased between the years of 1991 and 2001, the amount of female workers has decreased. These statistics suggest that both educated and uneducated women are limited to subservient roles in society; the education and experience they receive in college does not necessarily lead to employment. Instead, the institution’s restrictions prepare them for a life under the authority of a patriarchal and authoritarian system not to be questioned or challenged.

Despite the numerous restrictions, some argue that the women in Kerala’s higher education are given adequate representation and advocacy. In student union elections, there is often at least two or three “lady representatives” who address women’s issues on campus. However, when the majority of the student body (sometimes more than 80%) is female, this representation becomes grossly disproportionate. Furthermore, while men of political parties strike for even moot points, the women remain silent about their oppression. They have come to accept the hidden discrimination committed against them daily. Some argue this phenomenon is cultural; but where does culture end and unjust totems begin? Even educated and respected female professors adhere to a socially enforced discriminatory dress code pressuring them to wear saris.

Herein lies the hardest struggle: female students seeking equality receive little support on campus from men, women, teachers and peers alike. Resistant action by women is looked upon with contempt. Even the colleges’ pro-left political parties whose ideology demands equal rights and democracy for all often ignore the issues of women’s rights on campus. As the “oppressed majority” of the world, do women not fall under this category? Instead, male college students are granted the illusion of power and human agency in the form of political strikes and elections that become little more than a stage for their adolescent angst. Rather than challenging the authority to change unjust policies, often times their energy is focused on defeating the opposing party. The institution can permit such acts of “rebellion” with little fear, because the students rarely turn their violence on the system. Only when meaningful resistance is directed at the patriarchal and authoritarian establishment will the dictatorial hold on institutionalized education be broken.

The situation found in Kerala’s higher educational institutions is perhaps indicative of the greater social malady. With one-third of the 12 million girls born in India dying in their first year, and 25% dying before the age of 15, discrimination is faced from cradle to the grave. Abortion of female fetuses is becoming ever more prevalent: statistics show a decline in the number of girls born from 945 to 927 for every 1000 boys (1991-2001). Adult women have to face employment discrimination, domestic violence, rape and sexual exploitation. In the year 2000, there was a woman raped every hour. The National Family Health Survey 2007 found that 37.2 % of married women experienced spousal violence. The National Crimes Bureau Home Ministry reported 5,199 dowry deaths in 1994. Unfortunately, this violence is often ignored by the judicial system and the culture at large. It is even justified by transforming the victim into the perpetrator: accusing the woman of provoking her attacker. In a nation lauded as “the largest democracy in the world,” why are women’s voices still silenced? Not until equality exists for everyone, regardless of sex, caste, race or religion, can a true democracy exist.

Necessary to the empowerment of women is legislation and institutions that facilitate the exercise of individual freedoms, provide opportunities for education and work, and allow the uninhibited expression of ideas. Though world wide initiatives aim at empowering women, activist Aruna Rao asserts, “women’s lack of rights (equality under the law), resources (equality of opportunity) and voice (political equality) all inhibit achievement of this goal.” Only when regulations ensuring equality for women are written and justly enforced can there be hope for improvement of the female situation. Only when women are given opportunities to exercise their capacities in educational institutions and workplaces will they feel the power to take a stand. Not until women are given a platform to speak freely for their interests and against discrimination will they find equal footing with men. Ultimately, the viewpoint of society must transform. Words can be written on parchment, but they also must be written in the hearts and minds of humanity. Women have been the subordinate people group since the beginning of time, but history does not legitimize injustice. Inequalities must be recognized and resisted, challenged and changed.