TechnoTeachers are Entrepreneurs

The job of the teachers who try to integrate technology keeping pedagogical implications in mind is no less than entrepreneurs.

Their road is equally rocky filled with land mines.

This pilgrim's journey also passes through Slough of Despond, Hill Difficulty, Valley of Humiliation, Valley of the Shadow of Death, Doubting Castle, and the River of Death.

Such teachers have to fight to defeat teachers like Giant Despair, Giant Diffidence, Lord Hate-Good; and sometimes fight to win on their side people like , Obstinate, Mrs. Know-Nothing, Mrs. Bat's-Eye, Giant Maul, Mr. Fearing, Giant Slay-Good, Mr. Feeble-Mind and Mr. Ready-to-Halt.

TechnoTeachers, not only not only have to be self-motivated, but keep motivation level of most of other teachers, who are taking initial steps in using technology, high, hale and hearty.

As mentioned in this infographic, integrating technology is no less than entrepreneurship for teachers. Except for #2 , all these are golden rules for teachers who are willing to integrate technology. In #4, read *Students* instead of *investors*. #5 & #6 are imp. Keep sharing your innovative teaching practices on social media n do not get distracted by negative comments of people with crab mentality.

Huxley vs Orwell: Dystopian Truth in Post-truth era

Literature, they say, is mirror reflection of not only the time in which it is written but the time that is hidden in future. Some literary texts are so profound that it takes decades to realize the truth captured by the visionary writers. Aldous Huxley's Brave New World (1931) and George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949) are such literary texts. The recent developments in England (BrExit), USA (Donald Trump), France and India (Right Majority coming to power) in 21st century is challenging Globalization. Some see these democratically accepted changes quite critically. But we should not forget that there are backlashes to these challenges also. These backlashes are  signs of more matured form of Democracy. It is this maturity that stands up to question the rise of majoritarianism, religion-ism, region-ism and nationalism.

Neil Postman in the Forward to his book Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business (1985) compares these two literary texts to conclude that '. . . Huxley and not Orwell, was right'. See below given infographic to understand how Postman believed that Huxley's prophecy seems to be happening thing rather than that of Orwell's.

However, it seems that the prophetic observation made in 1985 by Neil Postman also seems to be limited, if not untrue. There is no possibility of denying the fact that in the year 2017, we are amusing ourselves to stupidity, celebrating dumbness and feeling sensible in nonsense stuff. The kind of lived life shared on social media is living example of it.

Moreover, the Orwellian truth that the Big Brother is watching - under the garb of surveillance and security, grabbed (disguised) control over the subjects seems equally profound. Without inflicting pain, people like docile animals are chained through technology. The power will support the spread of inter'NET' and the hi-bandwidth which, ultimately, will help them to trap and capture citizens and each and every move they make. The Think Police is near than we can ever imagine - and they have a battalion of trolls with them. The trolls do something significant. They instigate. They press the right nerve. They make person express/write/post/tweet something really nasty, really blasphemous, really anti-national. This makes it easy for the Ideological State Apparatus to function smoothly against the voice of dissent.

Huxley and Orwell, together, makes an interesting sense to understand our post-truth era.

  

Image source: http://highexistence.com/amusing-ourselves-to-death-huxley-vs-orwell/

Films, Feminism and Reservation Policy

नारीवादी ओ को नारी प्रधान फिल्मो जैसे की पिंक और दंगल में एक बात खटकती है। ऐसा क्यूँ की इन फिल्मों में सुधारवादी या नारी सशक्तिकरण की बाते कोई बूढ़ा सा पुरुष की जबान में कही जाए?
एक जवाब है।
एक हिंदी कविता में ये लिखा है जो काफी महत्वपूर्ण है।

तुम्हारे भीतर हैसदियों पुराना एक खूसट बूढ़ाजो लाठियां ठकठकातेअभी भी अपनी मुंछों कोतेल पिलाते रहता हैआखिर तुम कैसेउसकी झुर्रियों के जाल सेबाहर आ पाओगी

आखिर कोई कैसेसदियों तक अपनी जमीनबंधक रहने दे सकता है।

इस कविता में यह बात को पुष्टि मिलती है कि कही न कही बूढी दी पुरुषप्रधान समाज व्यवस्था नारी के subjugation का कारण है। इस व्यस्था का विद्रोह, विरोध और रेजिस्टेंस होना चाहिए। यह जबतक सुबजुगटेड इडेन्टिटीज़ नहीं समजेगी और रेजिस्टेंस नहीं करेगी तब तक मुक्ति नहीं मिल सकती।
इस समझ के साथ, यज भी समजना जरूरी है कि इस सुधारवादी सफर में अगर हेजिमोनिक पॉवर साथ ना देकर अगर खींचातानी में उतर आता है तो पूरी व्यवस्था में अराजकता फ़ैल जाती है।
इसलिए इस प्रकार की सुधारवादी मूवमेंट्स में हेजिमोनिक पोजीशन में रहे लोगो को आगे आने की जरूरत रहती है। एहसान करने या कुछ देने के लिए नहीं परंतु एक उत्तरदातित्व समझ कर यह करना अनिवार्य है।
बस यही पिंक और दंगल जैसी नारिप्रधान फिल्मों में बुड्ढे पुरुष कर रहे है।
यह अनिवार्य सलूशन नहीं है। इसके बिना भी यह हो सकता है। लेकुन किंतु परंतु, अगर ऐसे पेरीफेरल रेजिस्टेंस को सपोर्ट हेजिमोनिक सेंटर से मिले तो समाज अराजकता से बच कर , एकजूट हो कर प्रोग्रेस कर सकता है।
सबसे महत्वपूर्ण है अपने (self) अंदर से दुसरो (other)  को समझने का प्रयास करे।

इस ऐनक के साथ रिजर्वेशन पालिसी को देखे तो आज समाज को जो बंटवारा हो रहा है उसे अराजकता से बचाया जा सकता है।
भारत के बहुत सारे राज्यो में सुवर्ण जातीओ को अल्प संख्यक या पछात जातियो में शामिल करने की मुहिम चल रही है।
इस मूवमेंट का एक कारण यह है कि बहोत सारे पछात या बिछड़ी जाती के लोग अच्छी पोजीशन में पहुँच चुके है। यह लॉग ना सिर्फ अमीर बन चुके है पर यह अब पॉवर पोज़िशन्स में है और अपना हेजिमोनिक स्ट्रक्चर बना रहे है। यह थोड़ा हानिकारक है।

जौसे पिंक और दंगल में दिखाया गया है की कोई पुरुष अगर आगे आएंगे तो बात बिना अराजकता से सुलझ सकती है, वैसे अगर वह बिछ्ड़ी जाती के लोग जो लिबरेट हो चुके है वह आगे आकर अपना सैविधानिक हक जाने दे और अपनी नई पीढ़ी को यह समझ दे तो आनेवाले कल को हम सामाजिक अराजकता से बचा सकते है।
यह परिवर्तन इन्ही जाती के लोगो से आना अनिवार्य है।
इसके साथ सवर्ण जाती के लीगो को भी अपनी नई पीढी को ऐतिहासिक समझ देनी है। इतिहास में जिन लीगो के साथ अन्यायपूर्ण व्यवहार हुआ उसकी भरपाई करनी अभी बाकी है - यह समझ भी इतनी ही जरूरी है।

हो यह राहा है कि जिन बिछ्ड़ी जाती के लोगो ने बेनिफिट्स लेके एक मुकाम हासिल किया है , किसी प्रकार के पावर पोज़िशन्स में पहुँच चुके है, वह लोग भी मिल रहे बेनेफिट्स का त्याग नहीं कर रहे। जिस तरह पिंक और दंगल में बुड्ढे पुरूष की आवश्यकता है, ठीक उसी तरह बैकवर्ड क्लास में प्रोग्रेसिव लोगो को आगे आने की भी आवस्यकता है।
जिस तरह महावीरसिंह फोगाट की कहानी लड़कियों के सशक्तिकरण में एक महत्वपूर्ण कदम है, ठीक उसी तरह, बिछ्ड़ी जाती से क्रीमी लेयर के लोगो को आगे आने की जरूरत है।
यह प्रक्रिया में भी अंदर के लोग ही मदद कर सकते है।
अब हम समय की ऐसी कागार पर खड़े है जहाँ इन दो प्रकार की ट्राजेक्टरी बनाना अनिवार्य है - सवर्ण जाती के लोग अपने बच्चो को ऐतिहासिक सत्य, सामाजिक अन्याय के तत्थयो को बराबर समजाये
और बिछ्ड़ी जाती के वह लोग जो आर्थिक, सामाजिक तौर पर क्रीमी लेयर बन चुके है वह आगे आये और अपना सैविधानिक अधिकार त्यागे।

हम सब जानते है यह मुश्किल है लेकिन नामुमकिन नहीं है। लोगो को एजुकेट करे तो यह हो सकता है।

एक और रास्ता भी है।
थोड़ा कठिन है।
इसमें दो जनरेशन का समय लग सकता है।
लेकिन परिणाम बेहतरीन हो सकता है।
हमें सिर्फ यह करना है कि - आजसे जन्म लेने वाले हर एक बच्चे को नाम नहीं नंबर दिया जाये।
न पहला नाम, न दूसरा नाम, न आखरी नाम। सिर्फ और सिर्फ नंबर।
हमारी भाषा और लिपि सेक्युलर नहीं है। भाषा सांप्रदायिक, धार्मिक, सांस्कृतिक, जातिगत, लिंगजन्य है। हमारे आंकड़े इन विभाजनों से मुक्त है। भाषा और लिपि को छोड़, आंकड़े की और जाने से शायद हम एक बेहतरीन समाज की व्यवस्था का निर्माण कर सकते है।

यूटोपिया वैसे तो ख्याली पुलाव है फिरभी मानव सहज है कि हम यूटोपिया की ख्वाहिश और सपना छोड़ नहीं सकते, तोड़ नहीं सकते।

Education System: School in Forest

In Derridean discourse, it is believed that *Language bears within itself the necessity of its own critique*. The element to undermine the proposition or hypothesis lies within itself.

जो भी हम कहना चाहे
बर्बाद करे अल्फाज़ हमारे  (Irshad kaamil)

_When I pronounce the word Future,the first syllable already belongs to the past._
_When I pronounce the word Silence,I destroy it._
_When I pronounce the word Nothing,I make something no non-being can hold_
( Wislawa Szymborska)

When Chetan Bhagat makes his God say *medium amount* of Intelligence and *a bit* of Imagination, he is actually deconstructing himself.

उसके शव्द उसको बार्बाद कर रहे है।
How? Well, a good literature is not possible without proper use of intelligence and imagination. Intelligence helps to rationalize the events and imagination helps in connecting events with the philosophical thought.

The popular literature is not 'real literature' because it lacks depth of intellectual analysis. Its flight of Imagination is also without wings of philosophy.
Thus only these two adjectives for intelligence n imagination are enough for the critique popular literature. Anyhow, the popular literature has all capacities to transcend these boundaries. It all depends on how deeply the writer can penetrate while dealing with shallowness of its content. Thus, in Chetan Bhagat's use of these words undermines entire popular literature or a sort of 'dramadies' written by similar writers.

Well, we are here to look critically at a popular meme on education system.
Below is given a popular meme on a satire on education system. It is very interesting to see how it criticizes the 'standardization' of education system. To a greater extent it is very difficult to disagree with the statement of satire made by this popular meme.

Well, can we find anything in this image to deconstruct it?

If language bears within itself the necessity of its own critique, how can we find the aporia / loose stone in this meme to deconstruct its very existence. On what grounds can we undermine the signifier so us to make Sign have different signified? 

One of the ways of doing so is to deconstruct the metaphor. The literal reading of metaphor can help in presenting a critique of its sign. In this meme, the animals are used metaphorically. The animals suggest humans with varied capabilities. One animar is good in the skill which it is meant to perform and is utterly incapable of performing other skills. Similarly, it attempts to suggest that humans cannot do everything. All humans are born with a gift to do one or the other things.

That's fine. But this 'maxim' that humans cannot do everything is not aptly used in this meme. Rather, it is fact that humans can do whatever they want to. Though humans are animals, yet humans are intelligent animal. Only human beings have intelligence as well as imagination. This makes human beings capable to have philosophy as well as historical sense. These capacities makes humans far better than other animals. Especially, when it comes to education, there is no parallel between humans and animals. Yes, training is a different things. We can train animals into doing several things and can use them in Circus or domesticate to use them for agrarian works. But we cannot educate animals . We cannot teach language to animals. We cannot teach language to philosophise or have historical sense. Thus, this meme do not convey the right message. It may be good for the satire on 'standardization of tests' but not at all on 'education system'.

Do you have any other points to deconstruct this metaphor?

Can teacher's leave workplace on time?

Can teacher's leave workplace on time?

If teachers like other work professionals leave workplace on time, is it good for them? Can they do so? Can't say if this was really said by workaholic Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam, but this cannot be applicable on genuine workers in any profession, and never on teachers.

• 'Love your job, but never love your company . . .' - This cannot be applicable to teachers. Teachers do not work with things, files, personnel. They work with real human beings who are 'students' of varied age group - kids, teens, young adult or just adults. They are 'company' of teachers. Teachers love their company and this company never stops loving them. So, it is irrelevant if teachers are advised to believe in these words.
•  If 'classroom' is the 'office' for teachers, teachers can leave classroom, but classroom always remains in the mind of the teacher. You can remove teacher out of classroom, but you cannot remove classroom (along with students) our of teacher's mind.
• It is true that work is never - ending process. The process is to be enjoyed. But to say that 'it can never be completed' is not fair. If the prime work of teacher is to complete syllabus, it can be and should be completed in due time.
• The students are not clients. They are a part of family - an extended family. True teachers think of character and career of students first and then their own children.
• If teacher fails, the society has to pay heavy price. Neither family nor friends can repair the loss incurred by society because of failure of a teacher.
• Teaching does not make life meaningless. Giving meaning to student's life is never meaningless. There can never be anything more to life than the class of smart students. There is no better place to socialize (students are real human beings to socialize), entertain (teaching is half theatre), relax (nothing relaxes better than having somebody to listen) and exercise (most calories burn in teaching) than classroom.
• There can be no better lie than point no. 5. Those teachers who are administrators also, have to stay late to do admin work as during regular hours, they are in classroom. All office work in pending which has to be completed after all students have left the institute. And teachers carry lots of works of assessment etc for home work. So they do work late nights in preparing some activities, tasks, projects and are busy evaluating students' outcome.
• Teachers are not machines. They are real human beings, who work with real human beings. So, their work can never be reduced to machine. Teaching is not mechanical job. The teachers may be teaching same topics, year after year, but it always changes the level of teaching, keeping learners in mind. Machines cannot do so.
• Working late is not the proof of having meaning less life. The teachers who have found real meaning of teaching, work late hours, not only at workplace but at home also.
• If you are teacher who work hard (or smart or what so ever people want to say) and get this advice from anybody, forward this blog to Mr/Ms. Adviser.  

Post-truth: The Word of the Year 2016

On Defining Post-Truth

• After much discussion, debate, and research, the Oxford Dictionaries Word of the Year 2016 is post-truth – an adjective defined as ‘relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief’. (Source: Oxford Dictionary)

Why was this chosen? (Click to read)

A brief history of post-truth (Click to read)

How should we read Post-truth?

• The compound word post-truth exemplifies an expansion in the meaning of the prefix post- that has become increasingly prominent in recent years. Rather than simply referring to the time after a specified situation or event – as in post-war or post-match – the prefix in post-truth has a meaning more like ‘belonging to a time in which the specified concept has become unimportant or irrelevant’. This nuance seems to have originated in the mid-20th century, in formations such as post-national (1945) and post-racial (1971). (English Language and Usage)
• In many election campaigns, misinformation and disinformation have victory over information. Facts are no longer considered important in campaigns characterised by post-truth situation. People, manipulated by emotional appeals, treat misinformation and disinformation as information. Recall two recent events — the Brexit and the Trump campaigns. In both the campaigns, emotional appeals and feelings, and not facts (truth), were the factors for Britain leaving the European Union and the triumph of Trump.
• Evidence-based facts and analysis that Brexit will not be beneficial to the country did not convince fifty-two per cent of the voters in the UK. As Sir John Major has said, the voters were bamboozled by ‘a whole galaxy of inaccurate and frankly untrue information’. It was a post-truth campaign. Take the recent US Presidential campaign by Donald Trump. Though about seventy percent of the statements he made during the election campaign were rated false (by PolitiFact), which was nearly three times the falsity score of Hillary Clinton, Trump was considered more honest and trustworthy than Clinton.
• It is a classical example of post-truth politics. The nouns that collocate with post-truth are: politicians, era, age, politics, journalism, journalists, brigade, presidency, etc. Examples: post-truth politicians, post-truth era, post-truth journalists, and post-truth brigade. Here are examples of how the word is used in sentences: Mr Trump has been described as the leading exponent of post-truth politics — a reliance on assertions that “feel true” but have no basis in fact.
• Post-truth politicians along with post-truth journalists and post-truth campaigners are responsible for creating post-truth voters. In the post-truth age, using euphemisms is a trend to convey that someone is a liar. He misinformed the public. (Albert p'Rayan)

Here are some interesting observations by Kathleen Higgins: (Source: nature.com)

• Post-truth refers to blatant lies being routine across society, and it means that politicians can lie without condemnation. This is different from the cliché that all politicians lie and make promises they have no intention of keeping — this still expects honesty to be the default position. In a post-truth world, this expectation no longer holds.
  This can explain the current political situation in the United States and elsewhere. Public tolerance of inaccurate and undefended allegations, non sequiturs in response to hard questions and outright denials of facts is shockingly high.
• More radical forms of relativism are often denounced as under­mining basic values. Friedrich Nietzsche, the nineteenth-century phil­osopher who is often invoked to justify post-truth, was such a relativist, and he does suggest at times that deception is rife and should not be cat­egorically rejected. His point is to complicate our view of human behaviour and to object to moral certainties that encourage black-and-white judgements about what’s good and what’s evil. Thus he denies that there are moral facts, saying that we have only “moral interpretations”, and in doing so denies that moral assertions are unconditionally true. But this does not mean there is no truth. Even when he claims that our truths amount to our “irrefutable errors”, he is pointing to the exaggerated clarity of abstractions by comparison with empirical reality.
• In fact — contrary to how he is often presented — Nietzsche held intellectual honesty at a premium. His most strenuous rejections of ‘truth’ are mostly directed not at truth, but at what has been asserted as true. Yes, Nietzsche was an elitist who was sceptical of democracy, and so his work does not necessarily fault leaders for talking down to the public. But it also points out the inconsistency of religious teachers who assume they have the right to lie.
• Scientists and philosophers should be shocked by the idea of post-truth, and they should speak up when scientific findings are ignored by those in power or treated as mere matters of faith. Scientists must keep reminding society of the importance of the social mission of science — to provide the best information possible as the basis for public policy. And they should publicly affirm the intellectual virtues that they so effectively model: critical thinking, sustained inquiry and revision of beliefs on the basis of evidence. Another line from Nietzsche is especially pertinent now: “Three cheers for physics! — and even more for the motive that spurs us toward physics — our honesty!”

• Teaching in the post-truth era - Paullete Delgado

• Click here to read

• Here is an interesting example:

The students of Nirma University, Ahmedabad, Gujarat were agitating regarding weekend holidays.

The news paper reported it like this:

The news reads: "The students of Nirma Univeristy are agitating as they are given holidays on 2nd and 4th saturdays which is normal practice in Public Universities and govt institutions.

As soon as this was posted on Instagram, the comment from one of the students was posted. Read it:

• Humour helps understand difficult concept: