Please cull out the data mentioned in the article for advocacy in the Courts. These data may prove very handy for taking up discrimination of disabled candidates in the appointment across the universities.
http://www.epw.in/journal/2016/6/commentary/discrimination-campuses-higher-learning.html Vivek Kumar ([email protected]) teaches at the Centre for the Study of Social Systems/School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. We need to understand the many-headed nature of discrimination prevailing on the campuses of higher education in India. This article argues that discrimination, exclusion and humiliation in campuses can be expressed at different levels: in appointments, admission of students, content of curricula of the Social Sciences and Humanities, the way teachers and Dalit students interact, and how upper caste students interact with their Dalit counterparts. The article is based on the narratives of Dalit students and teachers collected purposively from different universities across the country. Rohith Vemula’s suicide in Hydera-bad Central University has raised some very important issues regarding the environment prevailing on the campuses of higher education. We need to ask whether universities have become democratic and inclusive in their ethos. Are they representative in their composition? Is there diversity in the appointment of the heads of the institutions—vice chancellors and directors? Is there diversity in appointing teachers—professors, associate professors, assistant professors and university employees (officers and clerks)? Do the admissions of students represent diversity? It is important to analyse all this because if all of them—heads of institutions, teachers and students—come from the same social background with their own cultural baggage, then there will be no caste-based discrimination and exclusion on the campuses of higher learning. However, if the composition comprises a minority of actors with a stigmatised natural identity, then discrimination and exclusion are bound to occur. In this context, by mere observation we can argue that these institutions are not yet inclusive, and hence not democratic. For instance, out of 46 central universities and one open central university only one vice chancellor belongs to the Scheduled Tribe (ST). In Madhya Pradesh, out of 19 universities there is one Scheduled Caste (SC) vice chancellor and in Uttar Pradesh in 25 state universities there is no one from the SC category. These examples are sufficient to bring home the point that these universities are not inclusive. In the same vein, according to information obtained through the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the University Grants Commission (UGC) revealed that till 2009–10, out of 1,688 sanctioned professors and 3,298 associate professor posts there were only 24 professors and 90 associate professors in 24 central universities from the SC category. In percentage terms, it is 2.73% and 4.4%, respectively, vis-à-vis the constitutionally mandated 15% of reservation for SCs. The exclusive character of higher education comes out all the more when we discern that only 13.5% and 4% of the students in higher education belong to the SC and ST categories, respectively. That proves the point that our higher education systems lack diversity. Do we not need a social audit and roster for the appointment of heads of such institutions? Subtle and Disguised A number of teachers and students cutting across disciplines who belong to the Dalit community and are teaching and studying in different universities and colleges say that a very different kind of social exclusion, discrimination and humiliation exists on the campuses of higher education in India. Discrimination crops up many a time in its ancient and crude form of caste discrimination such as not sharing a room (hostel rooms for Dalit students and staff rooms for Dalit teachers), not sitting at the same dining table or drinking water from the same tap used by Dalits. New forms of discrimination have been added such as upper caste hostel mates not allowing Dalit students to put up posters of their icons in the hostel rooms, discrepancies in grades of Dalit students when graded by upper caste teachers, professors and university employees not signing scholarship forms of Dalit students, and Dalit student names being displayed with their categories. Yet, most of the time discrimination and humiliation is very subtle and sophisticated. It is disguised in the ornamental and metaphorical language used, body gestures, and in the garb of implementing objective institutional rules. It is the individual experience—each being so different and unique that it is difficult to develop a typology. However, we can still evolve a typology on the basis of similarities and repetitive experiences of Dalits on campuses. For instance, a number of students have revealed with pain that they are referred as sarkari damads (government’s sons-in-law) or sarkari Brahmins (government Brahmins) by upper caste students in different universities. On IIT campuses, Dalit students are named as Saddus (an epithet derived from the term Scheduled Castes and Tribes) or Cata students (derived from SC and ST as a separate category). In Delhi colleges, Dalit girls with deep anxiety have spoken about how they are ridiculed by the question “Quote se aye ho ya kothe se” (Have you come via reservation quota or brothel?) In the same vein, another set of Dalit students, from different universities across the nation, have complained that they have been denied a PhD or MPhil supervisor for months together. Or that their upper caste supervisor did not allow them to pursue research on a particular theme. Or that their supervisor forced them to change their PhD research topic after they had worked on it for two or three years. Or that the supervisor delayed returning the thesis chapters with comments, or that supervisors did not send the thesis for evaluation to external examiners or the students were awarded the PhD degree three or four years after final submission of the PhD thesis. (I met two students: one from IIT Delhi who was awarded a PhD degree in mechanical engineering 12 years after submission of his thesis; another student from the Centre for Biotechnology, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi who was awarded his PhD eight years after submission.) Along with this kind of discrimination against Dalit students in the Science disciplines, where experiments are a part of the curriculum, students have complained of delay in the allotment of supervisors and, hence labs. In some cases the lab was allotted only during office hours (that is, between 10 am and 5 pm) and a progress report was asked on a daily basis, though usually a progress report is asked at the end of the semester. If they get a lab they may not get the teacher’s help in the supply of relevant reagents and compounds to perform experiments. Even if they get all this they may not get the attention or help of the professors who can instil in them the confidence that their experiment is in the right direction. Many upper caste supervisors do not include their names in research papers—to be presented in a seminar or to be published in a journal by a Dalit student (a standard practice in Science is that student researchers use the name of supervisors in their papers as they are working under him (her) and in his (her) lab). Further, Dalit students have complained that their supervisors or teachers refuse to give them recommendation when they apply for a scholarship or a job. At least a dozen of Dalit postdoctoral fellows (PDFs) working in different universities and research institutes in the US, from Yale to MIT, have shared with me how badly they were treated in India as PDFs which forced them to leave the country. Sometimes, a loud voice or the aggressive body gesture of a Dalit student may also be considered as disrespect and indiscipline by an upper caste teacher. Teachers are not patient enough to locate these gestures within the contextual social background of the students. Instead, they hold the students as indisciplined, discourteous and arrogant. Further, good English is equated with disciplinary knowledge, a questionable preposition. There is no room for less bookish knowledge mixed with experiential knowledge, which is articulated in broken and grammatically incorrect English to be also termed as knowledge. Are teachers, in general, sensitive enough to evaluate a loud and aggressive Dalit student with his experiential knowledge and speaking in broken English and treat him/her at par with the average general caste student? I know most of the teachers will reject this idea on the pretext of objectivity. I do not rule out a few sympathetic teachers who may accept the idea but that amounts to patronage and is not a systemic act or decision. That is only by default and not by design. In a dispute between a Dalit and upper caste students the Delhi High Court has highlighted the deeply entrenched caste prejudice among the authorities of a central university, including the vice chancellor of the university, against the Dalit student in no uncertain terms. The judge observed, …it is clear that the impugned order is unsupportable in law; it is arbitrary …I cannot help in commenting the utterly indefensible conduct of the University which shows it in poor light…the defences put forth, by it, of an enquiry against someone likely to be irreversible prejudiced by its action …is disquieting at this point. Such a stand perhaps would have been considered proper in medieval times where the writ of a monarch could run unquestioned and his authority, accountable to none. That [a] Vice-Chancellor of the University has chosen to support such a stand and apparently “applied his mind” is alarming to say the least…Almost half a century ago, in another context, the Supreme Court articulated the goal of the Constitution of [a] social equity and caste less society … Sadly, the stark reality of caste prejudice has been highlighted in this case. The [University], consistent with its mandate of promoting modern education and secular values, unfortunately displayed rank insensitivity. There is no more justice where the victim and the oppressor are treated alike, as were the lion and the lamb afforded the same treatment. That (University) has done so, betrays its callousness, to say the least. (In the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi; WP(C) 4980/2007, Pronounced on 28 November 2007.) Now many of these experiences are so personal, unique and told from one side that we cannot substantiate their authenticity as fact. However, the repetitiveness of the events gives us a trend and a pattern. Therefore one is forced to ask, why is it happening only with Dalit students? Inbuilt in the Structure Besides, discrimination, exclusion and humiliation are inbuilt in the structure of curriculum and pedagogy, that is, the way the curriculum is framed and the way it is taught. This is more applicable to the Social Sciences and Humanities. In such disciplines, there is almost a total domination by upper-caste values, norms, institutions, icons, social, political and Bhakti movements, political parties and movements. In turn, Dalits, Adivasis, minorities and women are excluded from discussion. There is a virtual cognitive blackout of Dalit icons, their social movements, contributions through labour, norms and values, and their political parties. Even if a few of them have found the space they needed, they suffered stigmatisation, and their stories never get discussed in the classrooms independently on their own. For instance, Ambedkar will never be taught independently. Either he is taught in reference to Gandhi or reduced only to a Dalit messiah. Why can we not teach him as an independent social thinker who contributed to diverse spheres of life—nation building, constitution builder, educationist, economist, protector of women’s rights, etc? Even if a few topics around these themes are included they are seldom asked in exams, and, if asked, they are only optional questions. Hence it is only pseudo inclusivity that we see or for name’s sake. Assertion and Consciousness Activist and assertive Dalit students have lamented that university authorities, professors and students belonging to the general categories do not appreciate them making independent assertions and demands for self-representation. Dalit youth assertion, however, can be directly traced back to the 1970s Dalit Panthers and the Namantar movement in Maharashtra (for changing the name of Marathwada University to Ambedkar University). But Dalit students remained associated and are still in many universities associated with left and progressive student associations. However, after the emergence of the Bahujan movement—BAMCEF, DS4 and the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) led by Kanshi Ram in the 1980s—there developed a renewed sense of assertion among Dalit youth at the pan-India level. Kanshi Ram gave more teeth and sharpness to the Dalit assertion by establishing a new iconography. To name just a few this included Buddha, Sant Ravidas, Sant Kabir, Daadu, Jotiba Phule, Narayana Guru, Chhatrapati Shahu Maharaj of Kolhapur, E V Ramasamy Naicker (Periyar), Babasaheb Ambedkar, Savitribai Phule, Uda Devi Pasi, Maharaja Bijli Pasi and Jhalkari Bai Kori. From the 1990s onwards the BSP has come to power in Uttar Pradesh a number of times (though except for once only for small periods), and had become a national political party. The whole process instilled among Bahujan youth a high level of confidence. However, when these youth entered the universities they did not find their icons in their Social Science or Humanities curricula. But the consciousness of their icons did not fade away. Hence, they started celebrating and commemorating their birth and death anniversaries on the campuses. So, where till the other day we could see posters only of Gandhi, Nehru, Tagore, Vivekananda, Marx, Lenin, Azad and Bhagat Singh, etc, on the university walls, now Ambedkar, Phule, Periyar and others have also started appearing on the university walls. This has not been appreciated by the members of the general castes in the universities. But they cannot stop them directly. So many Dalit students say that “their anger comes to the fore in denial of permission to Dalit students to hold public meetings on the death and birth anniversaries of their icons.” In one of the IITs, students told me that Dalit students are so afraid to be identified as politically conscious that they do not participate in Babasaheb Ambedkar’s birth anniversary, 14 April, programme organised by the authorities. In one central university, teachers told me that when they participated in a programme on E V Ramasamy Naicker (Periyar) organised by Dalit students of the campus, the vice chancellor of the university instituted an inquiry against them. Assertive Dalit students who want to lead an independent ideological path do not have any political patronage in comparison with their upper caste counterparts. Most of the national and state political parties like the Congress and BJP, led and dominated by upper castes, have their student wings. The National Students Union of India, Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad, Students Federation of India, All India Students Federation, All India Students Association to name just a few, are student organisations which have a substantial presence in different university campuses. These student organisations get patronage from their parent organisations. Their party functionaries are either in government or in Parliament and provide full protection to the student members of their organisation. They provide ideological and many a time financial support to the student organisations to run their affairs both at the national and state levels. In comparison, the independent Dalit students’ organisations have to do everything on their own—from framing their ideology and programmes, to fighting against injustice on the campus. It is they who are at the forefront in doing all the celebrations and deliberations on behalf of Dalit students. And hence they are easy targets. White Paper on Universities Under these circumstances, the government of the day should bring out a White Paper on some 472 institutions of higher education—47 central universities (including one open university), 13 state open universities, 290 state universities, 38 deemed universities and 73 institutes of national importance. The paper should highlight the composition of the institutions—in heads of the institutions and representation of teachers, officers, and students belonging to different caste and communities. Above all, the paper should highlight the content of different Social Sciences and Humanities curricula. The paper should analyse whether or not our universities have become representative. Have they become inclusive of caste, communities and gender or have they been monopolised by one religion and by dominant castes? If they have not become inclusive, then we can evolve certain mechanisms to make them more representative. Otherwise we will not be able to offer social justice to our excluded communities. This will lead to more confrontation and conflict on the campuses of higher learnings. The second issue that should be highlighted in the White Paper is whether the SC/ST commissions, SCs and STs (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 (amended in 2015), the Protection of Civil Rights Act 1955 and the UGC regulations are effective enough to deal with such cases. What expertise do SC and ST commissions have to capture the exclusion and discrimination prevailing on the campuses, specifically in the light of the sophisticated and subtle nature in which they express themselves? Do we need new methods, or mechanisms to capture or measure and analyse the intensity and enormity of social exclusion and humiliation prevailing on the campuses of higher and professional educational learnings? -- Avinash Shahi Doctoral student at Centre for Law and Governance JNU Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of mobile phones / Tabs on: http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in Search for old postings at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send a message to [email protected] with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in Disclaimer: 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent through this mailing list..
