INDIA'S EDUCATION ( A CULTURAL GENOCIDE)

Chapter 4 A Clown's Education

England was also having an education model but it was not for the masses and mainly consisted of church teachings, this was the case till 1796. In February 1787 a Mr. Bell came to India and went ashore at Madras, where he stayed for 10 years. He became chaplain to several British regiments and gave a course of lectures. In 1789 he was appointed superintendent of an orphan asylum for the illegitimate and orphaned sons of officers. He claimed to see some Malabar children teaching others the alphabet by drawing in sand and decided to develop a similar method, putting bright children in charge of those who were less bright. He was opposed to corporal punishment and used a system of rewards.

In Bell's adaption of the Madras, or "monitorial" system as it later came to be known, a schoolmaster would teach a small group of brighter or older pupils basic lessons, and each of them would then relate the lesson to another group of children

In August 1796 he left India because of his health and published an account of his system, which started to be introduced into a few English schools from 1798/99, and he devoted himself to spreading and developing the system. He served as a priest in Edinburgh for a short time and married Agnes, daughter of Dr. George Barclay in December 1801. He was then appointed Rector of Swanage in Dorset and established a school there to teach straw-plaiting to girls and also using his system to teach infants

Bell received powerful support from the Church and his system was adopted in army schools and the Clergy Orphan School.  A Society was founded in November 1811 which set up schools using Bell's system. This was the National Society for the Education of the Poor in the Principles of the Christian Church. By the time of his death, twelve thousand schools had been established in Great Britain and the colonies. The system was also used by the Church Missionary Society and other institutions

One of the primary providers of education was the churches, which ran Sunday schools and day schools. As all Sunday schools taught reading (so that children could read the Scriptures) and some also taught writing and even arithmetic, they were an important source of education for working-class children during this period.

Growing in great numbers during the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, Sunday schools were moreover well attended. In 1800 there were 2,000, with enrolment covering about 10 percent of children between the ages of five and eighteen; by 1851 there were 23,000 Sunday schools, with enrolment covering around 55 percent (2.4 million children). Indeed, by the mid-nineteenth century, it was estimated that as many as three-quarters of working-class children had attended a Sunday school at some point in their lives.

The Church of England and the nonconformist churches also operated day schools—often called "voluntary" schools—with the non-denominational British and Foreign School Society being established in 1808 and the Church of England founding its National Society for Promoting the Education of the Poor in 1811; voluntary schools were also established by nonconformist denominations and Roman Catholics.

There was also a growing number of private schools during this period. In these, there were great variations in the quality of provision—from the "dame schools" which were often educationally worthless (many operating as a child-minding service) to very competent private schools for working-class children. Finally, education was also provided in many other settings, including some factories and Poor Law institutions.

However, as late as the 1850s, approximately half of all children in England and Wales attended no school (other than Sunday school). Day schools were not as popular as Sunday schools for working-class children, as they charged fees and operated during the week. Indeed, many working-class parents—especially unskilled workers—were forced through an economic need to send their children to work, rather than to school.

Moreover, as the average length of attendance was only around three years, even those children who did attend day schools probably did not achieve a high level of educational attainment. Back in India in 1835, a certain clown named Thomas Babington Macaulay spilled some garbage from his mouth which became the English education act.

Macaulay produced and circulated a Minute on the subject. Macaulay argued that support for the publication of books in Sanskrit and Arabic should be withdrawn, support for traditional education should be reduced to funding for the Madrassa at Delhi and the Hindu College at Benares, but students should no longer be paid to study at these establishments. The money released by these steps should instead go to fund education in Western subjects, with English as the language of instruction.

"To sum up what I have said, I think it is clear that we are not fettered by the Act of Parliament of 1813; that we are not fettered by any pledge expressed or implied; that we are free to employ our funds as we choose; that we ought to employ them in teaching what is best worth knowing; that English is better worth knowing than Sanskrit or Arabic; that the natives are desirous to be taught English, and are not desirous to be taught Sanskrit or Arabic; that neither as the languages of law, nor as the languages of religion, have the Sanskrit and Arabic any peculiar claim to our engagement; that it is possible to make natives of this country thoroughly good English scholars, and that to this end our efforts ought to be directed."

Macaulay also said, "We must at present do our best to form a class of persons Indian in blood and colour but English in tastes, in opinion, in morals, and in intellect."

William Bentinck (then governor-general) appears to have been anxious to settle the education controversy before his departure from India. As he gave the Minute his immediate assent, and to affect its speedy implementation, he deliberately prevented any discussion of Macaulay's scheme in the GCPI. General Committee of Public Instruction (India). Seed (1952) claims that Bentinck purposely withheld action on the education question until the very end of his term in office.

In Macaulay's letter dated 12th Oct. 1836, he wrote to his father:

"Our English schools are flourishing wonderfully; we find it difficult to provide instruction to all. The effect of this education on Hindus is prodigious. No Hindu who has received an English education ever remains sincerely attached to his religion. It is my firm belief that if our plans of education are followed up, there will not be a single idolater among the respected classes 30 years hence. And this will be effected without our efforts to proselytize; I heartily rejoice in the prospect".

Did you all notice that he mentions " that we are free to employ our funds as we choose, that we ought to employ them in teaching what is best worth knowing;". What this meant was that the company which would get all its revenue from the taxes paid by Indian people was now going to use that money to further their interests. This meant students who were studying at colleges were no longer going to be paid, this meant even in a heavily taxed and looted state India had enough wealth to pay its students to study.

So,this is information easily available and mostly this is where the criticism andexposes of the Indian education system exists in mainstream and social media.This however is just one-half of the whole story. So far, we have not reachedgenocide levels of cultural destruction. The teenagers reading this are goingto relate to the next chapter very well and I would like to ask everyone to seeif they find something similar to their schooling experience.