Stunting Intellectual Growth in Institutions of Higher Learning!

 

Stunting Intellectual Growth in Institutions of Higher Learning!

In recent times, the academic freedom in Universities across India has corroded. We read how the dissenting opinions were crushed in varsities- public universities such as the Central University, Hyderabad, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi University, Aligarh Muslim University, Jamia Milia Islamia, Jadavpur University, Visa Bharati, and private universities like Ashoka University and the Symbiosis International University, Pune, to name a few.  These universities were in news for stifling free academic discourse in their campuses.

 

However, what is disturbing is the manner in which free expression of academic views is suppressed by an elite institution of India- Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Bombay. As per the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Rankings, 2023, IIT Bombay ranks 1st in India and 149^th in the world. The Institute has a score of 81.9 in employer reputation, 73.1 in citation per faculty, 55.5 in academic reputation, 47.4 in employment outcome, 54.9 in sustainability, 18.9 in faculty-student ratio, 4.7 in international faculty, 8.5 in international research network and 1.4 in international students, all scores out of a maximum of 100 points. Among these nine parameters. Employer Reputation indicated the strongest one for IIT Bombay with a rank of 69 globally.

 

There seems to be some mismatch between the world rankings and academic autonomy and freedom of expression in the institutions ranked, that is the extent of academic intolerance is not reflected in the ratings. These ratings are handed over on the basis of certain parameters, which are not rational and universally true and partial to the western concept of higher education that mostly caters to the requirements of corporate world. It is inexplicable why the Indian universities are so crazy to chase these ratings, when the ecosystem of education in India is vastly different.

 

The IIT Bombay of late has gained notoriety. It is the first institute that recently segregated the students in the hostel mess on the basis of food they eat- vegetarian and non-vegetarian. And now comes out with a gag order curbing freedom of academic expression in the campus.  A scheduled lecture on ‘Israel-Palestine: The Historical Context’ by a retired Delhi University Professor Achin Vanaik, organized by the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS), was cancelled at the behest of a protest by some right-wing students.  Professor Sharmishtha Saha of the Department organized a documentary screening and guest lecture by theatre artist Sudhanva Deshpande.  A PhD student Omkar Superkar recorded the guest lecture on the Palestinian situation on his mobile and posted it online. It led to protest by an obscure right-wing outfit-Vivek Vichar Manch. Subsequently a group of students from the Institute filed a complaint at the Powai Police Station, alleging that Deshpande praised Zakaria Zubeidi, associated with the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, a coalition of Palestinian armed groups (HT 16/11). Anonymous phone calls and posts on social media platforms, called Professor Saha a traitor and death threats were issued to her.  

 

And instead of the Institute’s Director, Subhasis Chaudhuri, acting against the student who recorded the lecture, in spite of the objection and shared it with the outside extreme right-wing outfit and the other students for sullying the image of the institution, the Institute has now issued draconian guidelines for the faculty and the students.  According to the guidelines, public events organized by faculty should be approved by head of the academic unit: hereinafter authorities will clear invitations to external speakers and screening documentaries, even if they were for academic purposes. The students cannot organize any event except through the bodies recognized by the Institute. Protest marches or gatherings on campus require prior permission from the Institute and police. Violation of these guidelines will invite disciplinary action.

 

What is happening to our vibrant academic culture in institutions of higher learning? What is the use of getting high ranking when the institutions do not understand and acknowledge the importance of different points of view. What is the purpose of higher learning if mind is controlled and not allowed to express freely? How can a student grow intellectually, if he is not allowed to express contrary view?  What will the students do? “Burry their heads in the computers and never look up!”  It is evident the national premier institute- the   IIT Bombay- prioritizing political patronage over pursuit of knowledge. If the department of humanities and social sciences cannot invite guests who speak on burning national and international issues, irrespective of political connotations, what is the purpose of its existence?  

 

The IIT Bombay has brought disrepute upon itself, a blot, if it is to be considered a serious institution for the exchange of ideas and intellectual discourse. It explains how poor is its   academic and administrative leadership lacking in vision. demonstrating authoritarian streak. It is sidestepping the objective that “an institution of higher learning must be a safe place where students must not be intellectually mollycoddled or corralled. Different views can only widen their worldview and sharpen their cognitive process. Taking the easy way out-making political discussion verboten-will hurt the Institution” (Editorial, ET 17/11/23). The institution should remain the center of true learning, where students can access different views, examine them and question all assumptions.  After all, politics is part of any intellectual exchange.

Students in many US universities and elsewhere have protested against Israel's bombing and killing of civilians in Gaza. It is unthinkable that an elite Institution in India doesn't even allow a free discussion on the Israel-Palestinian conflict, uncharacteristic of an academic institution.  This is McCarthyism-using McCarthyist tactics against Palestinian sympathizers.   

 

And “when even elite institutions succumb to prohibitions so easily, it speaks very poorly for the prospects of free inquiry, that should, in fact, thrive in the scholarly ecosystem. Think about how unpopular the ideas of Galileo Galilei and Charles Darwin were in their own time. At a time when extreme polarization is doing widespread harm to social good, universities are uniquely placed to teach young citizens how to listen to discomfiting opinions instead of only occupying eco chambers” (Editorial, TOI17/11). Our institutions of higher learning are stunting intellectual growth of students, in their attempt to be politically correct, doing disservice to their profession.