"Ilm Roshni Hai", sounds familiar right? yes, it is something we all have heard growing up from our teachers and parents. But have we imagined a society where education does not illuminate dark minds with brightness? Where it isn't inclusive of all the races and hence normalizes typical stereotypes to corrupt the minds of the young. Where it doesn't serve to bind all the ethnicities together under a single curriculum but breed ethnic violence in the process. We have all seen it now.
The academic discourse isn't neutral at all. It perpetuates hatred and racism through curriculum whereas teachers work as enforcers of these ideologies and jeopardize the cognitive abilities of students to a great extent. Several state-centered motives are taken into consideration when designing the syllabus and this limits the mental capacities of students to think outside the box and hence dampens the critical thinking. Certain biases are ingrained into the teaching practices, whereby children in early stages of intellectual development grasp the flawed ideologies and ultimately indulge in intolerant behavior in the future. This further leads to ethnic violence and the root cause becomes the education that they received.
Now that we have an idea that education can somehow deteriorate the principles of inclusivity, diversity, and tolerance based on the prejudices instilled in the academic discourse, we look at an example. The picture on the right is from a children's textbook
from a Southeast Asian country, that is teaching some types of words and their antonyms based on pictorial representation. Yes! a standardized curriculum book that hundreds of students follow and base their understanding on. This speaks volumes about the inherent cultural stigmas that comes into play when designing curriculum and so the "neutral" education is posed as a threat to the cohesive impact of education. The picture reeks of western beauty standards embedded in the society and how that is normalized globally. This idea draws similarities to the normative processes we touched upon in the course, where the normalization of a concept, in this case the western beauty standards, fragments or deviates to an incorrect classification of the beauty criteria established by the West. Consequently, the assimilation of western standards, shown by the pictorial representation of Ugly and Beautiful in the textbook speaks much about how the world embraces the western concepts.
To put it simply, certain biases permeate through the academic discourse by the normative processes giving rise to disparities and ultimately leading to conflicting situations. This broadly refers to the way education can be related to conflicts based on the curriculum and emphasizes the urgent need for a critical reevaluation of educational content to foster inclusivity and understanding.
This blog raises extremely important points regarding the inherent biases present within curricula-development on a state level. I appreciate the detail to which you have explained the implementation of such biases through applying concepts related to fragile state creation (normalization, fragmentation, assimilation) to a different, albeit connected situation. Education is often looked upon broadly as a holistic concept, so your view of it as a threat to 'unity' provides a very interesting, nuanced view of of the concept. With that being said, I am interested in how these nuances apply outside areas affected disproportionately by post-colonial relations/media influences; the blog gives the example of Southeast Asia, and while one can apply it to the contexts of South Asia as well,…
This blog provides a critical look at how education, instead of being a unifying force, can perpetuate harmful stereotypes and biases. The example of the Southeast Asian textbook illustrating Western beauty ideals depicts the need for a thorough examination of what is being taught in our classrooms. It’s also troubling to think that educational materials, instead of breaking free from harmful norms, can sometimes reinforce those very norms such as narrow standards of beauty which exclude diverse representations.
An example that comes to mind is the shift to a single national curriculum in our country. While the intention may be to create uniformity, this curriculum may not be relatable to students given Pakistan's rich diversity. It is essential to develop an inclusive curriculum that not…
It is very important to note that education can be used as a political tool to carry forward the interests of those in power. In Pakistan this is done to otherwise anyone who stands up or questions the state. The censorship of the events unfolding in Baluchistan is testament to this. They are labelled as terrorists and disruptors, the reasons for their actions are not addressed resulting in other provinces to otherise and shun them. Similarly, the narrative about the war with Bangladesh is whitewashed in history books and Pakistan is labelled is victimized while the role played by Pakistan in the war in the form of violence is not explored and those who do attempt to explore it are…
Your blog raises significant concerns about how education can perpetuate harmful biases and cultural stigmas. I find the example of the Southeast Asian textbook illustrating "Ugly" and "Beautiful" particularly powerful - it highlights how deeply ingrained certain standards, like Western beauty ideals, can be in educational material. This raises an important question: if education is a means of shaping young minds, how can we ensure that it promotes inclusivity rather than reinforcing stereotypes?
That said, I do wonder whether the issue lies solely in the curriculum, or whether it also involves how teachers interpret and present this content. While textbooks may embed certain biases, aren't teachers also responsible for contextualizing or challenging these norms in the classroom? In many cases,…
Your critique of the educational system highlights a pressing concern: the potential for curricula to perpetuate biases and stereotypes rather than promote inclusivity and critical thinking. The phrase "Ilm Roshni Hai" embodies the ideal of education as a light for all, yet you effectively illustrate how education can become a tool of division and intolerance.
However, could we delve deeper into the consequences of this? While you rightly point out that biases in academic discourse can lead to ethnic violence, it raises the question of accountability. Who should be responsible for rectifying these entrenched prejudices? Is it solely the educators, or does the onus also lie with policymakers and curriculum designers?
Furthermore, your example of the textbook reflects broader societal…