From January to May of this year (2024), I taught an undergraduate course titled “Learning to Learn” to 110 students. I struggled at multiple levels during that time. By and large, I found that the students were not interested in the “process” of learning. They had been conditioned to care simply about attendance, grades based on formal assessments, and on “products” of learning - that could be brandished like trophies. Unless the course had measurable takeaways, and an “objective” exam at the end, they did not see any value in it. I realise now that I cannot blame the undergrad students. It would take time for them to unlearn the expectations drilled into them by their mainstream high school.
During the opening session of the online lecture series titled “Knowledge and Education: For/of/by whom? - Adivasi and Other perspectives”, organised by the Barefoot Philosophers in association with Bhasha Research and Publication Centre, Dr. Ganesh N. Devy made clear an important distinction between two ways of thinking about knowledge.
On November 2nd, 2024, Prof. Devy remarked that the first type of knowledge is the Greek “gnosis” or the Sanskrit “jñāna”. This is an internalisation of knowledge by consciousness. It can be thought of as a PROCESS which individuals experience - knowing. It is subjective. It can be a “transformative” process for an individual. For this kind of knowledge, a cultivation of habits plays a key role. The purpose of a course such as ‘Learning to Learn’ would fall under this category.
The second type of knowledge is the Greek “logos” or the Sanskrit “vidya”. According to Devy, this knowledge is a set of theories and techniques which can be thought of as “knowledge stock”. This type of knowledge is objective, may become outdated, and may need innovation. We can think of this as “technical knowledge”.
For Devy, the tragedy of our current mainstream education system in India is that from high school onwards, all emphasis is only on “knowledge stock” and not on “knowing”. This is how our education system is failing us and leading us to a collective suicide. We need to constantly balance our pedagogy so that it includes both an emphasis on “knowing” as well as “knowledge stock”.
As a graduate of the liberal arts, I wanted to place a greater importance in initiating “habits” in my students - such as critical reading, personal reflection and thoughtful writing. I wanted to open up new ways of thinking for them, to question their perspectives, and to learn from their peers. Perhaps I was being too ambitious in expecting an overnight haul.
Students need to of course be grounded in “techniques” - in the formal rules of a knowledge system. However, as educators, we also need to strive to build “habits” into them. Only through a mastery of habits and a dexterity with techniques is improvisation possible. The most rewarding type of learning for me has been a kind of improvisation that is rooted in habits, practice and techniques.
Pankhuri Agrawal
November 4, 2024
Comments