Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Tuesday, May 09, 2000

Front Page | National | International | Regional | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Features | Classifieds | Employment | Index | Home

Features | Previous | Next

Essential skill for employment

THE MOST important reason why parents prefer English as the medium of education in India is economic. The reason why aping Western culture is seen as desirable and superior is because of the superior economic position of the people with an easy familiarity with English. As of today, in India, knowledge of English opens opportunities in employment and education, not available to those who only know a vernacular language. Forceful attempts to thrust the vernacular down the throats of an unwilling public will not succeed unless it can be assured that the products of this kind of schooling are capable of securing employment with the same level of remuneration as those who know English. It is obvious to the general public that no government in India today can make any such assurance with any degree of credibility. Thus, the perorations of the self-appointed guardians of this or that vernacular language are merely self- serving. They seek to protect the interests of a small group who have made the knowledge of the language their source of employment. No one will quarrel with the right of any group to employment provided it is not inimical to the interests of the public at large.

Unfortunately, the attempt to force Tamil as the medium of instruction is precisely this - an attempt to protect the interests of a few at the cost of many. If Tamil is forced as the medium of instruction in Tamil Nadu, all that will be achieved is that the circle of privilege will become smaller, as all those parents who can manage it will move their wards to the CBSE schools or to another state. Those, who till now have scraped and scrounged to put their children in the second-rung English medium schools will be the worst affected. They will be forced to forgo the window of opportunity that these schools have offered.

All those who point to Japan, Germany and other such countries as examples, which have not needed English to achieve progress, fail to face certain basic facts. First, all these countries have only one main language, whereas India has at least 16. The problem of communicating within the country itself is enormous.

Second, all these countries had a fairly well developed science and technology base, whereas at the time of independence, colonised India had fallen far back. It was knowledge of English, which helped to jump-start our technological base, and if we have done better than most countries of Africa, it is at least partially, due to the advantage which fluency in English gave us, thus opening the doors to the Western knowledge base. But we are far from being at the cutting edge of science and technology in most areas, and can ill-afford the time and money required to translate all scientific literature into all the major languages of India.

Third, emigration for economic reasons is the exception in all developed countries while it is the rule in India. In other words, a large section of the Indian labour force, both manual and intellectual, seek employment opportunities in other countries. I wonder if any government has the right to deny them this opportunity when it cannot provide employment options within the country. Let us not forget that it is not only graduates of the IITs or medical colleges, who migrate abroad.

They are merely the most visible of the constant stream who seek foreign employment. Hardly anybody leaves the country of their birth without a pang of regret. But when fruitful life is difficult, migration will appear attractive. Until and unless a country can assure gainful employment to at least the majority, if not all of its citizens, it has no right to take any policy decision which will reduce the possibility of such employment.

The initiative to introduce Tamil as the medium of instruction is mere pandering to a pressure group, and not based on any true concern for the welfare of the students. If a hundred Tamil scholars can be considered popular pressure, what about all the parents who want English as the medium education? It is also misconceived parochialism. In Chennai city alone, live numerous people from other states for whom Tamil is not the mother-tongue. If it is psychologically distressing for them not to study in the mother-tongue, how will it be less distressing to study in Tamil than in English?

The ruling class in the world today are the English-speaking elites of the developed world. In India, the ruling class are the English-speaking industrial and rural elite. All the railing against MTV and Enid Blyton serve only to obfuscate a basic fact. The common people do not choose the environment in which they live. They merely seek to better their position within certain boundaries enforced by the state, which is the representative of the ruling class and acquiring fluency in English is a method of bettering one's position. Any attempt to take away this opportunity is not in the interest of the common people. It will only help a certain section of vested interests. They will arrogate to themselves many privileges as the protectors of Tamil, while those whom they claim to protect, the common people, will continue to languish.

It is therefore clear that, for the vernacular to become the natural medium of instruction, it is necessary to have economic developments, so that employment within the country is seen as the most desirable option. Underpinning this economic development, there will also be a social and cultural development in which indigenous cultures are not seen as inferior to Western ones.

Till such time, a single point programme of introducing this or that cultural change will be against the interests of the common people. Contemporary history is full of examples of such misguided policies forcefully thrust on an unwilling people, which have only pushed them deeper into deprivation. An extreme example is Pol Pot's Cambodia. Democracies, however imperfect, are based on choice. The state cannot arrogate to itself the right to impose the medium of instruction.

THOMAS GEORGE

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail


Section  : Features
Previous : Betting and abetting
Next     : Know Your English

Front Page | National | International | Regional | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Features | Classifieds | Employment | Index | Home

Copyright © 2000 The Hindu

Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu