Transcription of Interview 2

Transcription of Interview 2
Date: July 15, 2009 Time: 1 PM to 2 PM
Researcher: What do you think the nation should do to make people free to acquire knowledge through formal, non-formal and informal means?
Respondent: Obviously, there is a worldwide struggle among the three modalities of education delivery. In formal education setting there is more formality. As the nation wants to be formal it focuses on formal schooling. State wants formality. It accepts bureaucracy and vice-versa. There is more funding in it. As the state has recognized it, it has got more importance. It deserves symbolic capital as stated by Pierre Bourdieu.
The prestigious and high earning employees are from formal learning. Those who came informally were found having contradictory opinion with the state. Change agents were found as the ones who went through informal schooling. The products of formal schooling were found change resist. As Bernstein, who propounded the concept of restricted and elaborated code, says that informal learners are more open and flexible. As they are not recognized by the state they want change.
On the other hand the people from formal schooling are restricted by the state structure. When one gets board first in SLC he doesn’t complains even if he doesn’t like the state policy as he is bound to obey it. It’s a dialectical phenomenon. So, there is a never-ending war between these two: change resists (formal learners) and change agents (informal learner). You can see unemployed people on the street, who are not identified; neither are they recognized by the state. It develops the tendency of skill exchange. Informal learners follow antenna culture. That is to say they open their mind to learn all the time. They learn on the basis of lived reality. In this way informal learning has greater scope and horizon in comparison to formal learning.
Power scientists Cohort and Habermas discuss about power relation. They claim that there is politics or power in everything. Formal schooling protects the state. Whatever the state wants the formal schools fulfill. If you weaken formal schools it weakens the state. So, the state has given the responsibility of protecting it to formal schooling. But we can provide the responsibility of protecting the state to non-formal and informal modalities as well but it needs a philosophical package.
Conflict is mounting in our country because the nation couldn’t identify …it couldn’t reach to the grass-root level and encompass the indigenous skills and knowledge. The state applied blanket approach in this diversified nation in the name of formal schooling that killed indigenous skills and knowledge. Even formal schooling couldn’t provide indigenous security. Consequently the conflict mounted in the nation.
To overcome with this problem the state should make intervention on the basis of context, content and culture. The three forms of learning should go in equal footing, I mean in a triangular approach so that it will be easier to ventilate from one form of learning to another. It will have multiple advantages. There will be the possibility of bubble economy. People will be self-sustained leading to the development of micro economy. People will be self-employed that will engender the feeling of recognition and respect in the society. If we are able to do so there will be true respect of all three forms of learning. It will not denounce the one and appreciate the other. The approach of appreciative enquiry would work on this regard.
Researcher: You gave some profound and appropriate philosophical background to my issue. I would like to ask a bit more specific question. In your opinion can we provide certification to non-formal and informal learning as equivalent to formal learning?
Respondent: Yes, we can certify non-formal and informal learning. You can see the example in the skill-test certification strategy of CTEVT in our country. It has recognized the skills of an individual. It’s a good practice. But we need to do it in a large scale at national level. It will increase royalty to the nation, increase employment opportunity and the cultural capital of an individual.
Researcher: As you said earlier there are precious indigenous knowledge and skills learnt informally in our country. Can we identify them and keep them in a national qualifications framework? If we can, what problems do you see and how do you think we can solve those problems?
Respondent: Two years ago we developed a National Curricular Framework. There are some problems and weaknesses in it. It has also talked about informal learning. It also talks about local curriculum. It needs to be analyzed critically. It has not given importance to non-formal and informal learning as equally as formal learning. It’s incomplete. There should be level wise ventilation.
In the past different principles were adopted to reach to the unreached group of the country. The principle of unity-in-diversity and equality-in-diversity couldn’t work properly. So we need to adopt the principle of equity-in-diversity. You can see this phenomenon (bringing parity of esteem in formal, non-formal and informal learning) through this perspective as well. The three forms of learning are different with different upbringings. Rather than making them one let them develop on their own equally. On the basis of appreciative enquiry, through the perspective of appreciative enquiry we need recognize them in equal footing. Everybody is important and everybody is different. Same thing applies to the case of three forms of learning.
Researcher: Sir, the major problem in our country is the social status. One of the determining factors of high social status is employment opportunity. As you said earlier the person from formal schooling hold prestigious job positions. In such case, how can we provide equal employment opportunity to the ones who come non-formally and informally?
Respondent: Well, you know, the concept of employment opportunity is relative. Even all formal learners do not want to be employed; rather they have the interests and ability to be entrepreneur or to be self-employed such as opening a motorcycle workshop. According to choice theory people select their work. Here it is not the case what job is given – but what he or she chooses to do. We shouldn’t make people dependent. The state has to let them choose. Our schooling should leave them in the world of work.
We can provide equal certification. Equal in the sense that – Bandura’s leveling theory doesn’t work here …. Our SSR has discussed about it a little on level-wise ventilation. There is a ventilation system between technical education and general education in different level in Japan. It is called accreditation. We started technical education in the past. As we don’t have technical education at university level there is no ventilation. For higher studies people are compelled to join formal mode or to discontinue their study. State has not given due emphasis to technical education. A little progress can be observed on distance education system. As you know One Year B. Ed on the distance mode has been recognized by the state. People have been promoted because of that degree. So, what I want to say is that it is a good practice but it cannot be achieved without philosophical guidance. The state has to inculcate all three forms of learning
Researcher: Sir, let me ask you a specific question. Suppose that a person has never gone to school but he/she claims that s/he has the knowledge equivalent to the one who has passed B. Ed. Can we give him or her admission to Master Degree? What problem do you see?
Respondent: You asked a very good question. This system is in the US. One can take the test of all semesters at once if s/he wishes. But the thing is that we have to follow natural rule of law. It should be done on the basis of cognitive development. You need to use the theory of Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s to deal with this. Piaget talks about individual constructivism whereas Vygotsky talks about social constructivism. If one has constructed knowledge individually it’s ok but society has to recognize it. Taking both of these philosophies into account your question has to be addressed. Social constructivism is also important. For example if a 5-year boy claims for Master’s admission the social constructivism opposes it. He needs to have his maturity as well. On the basis of cognition he is not developed so we can’t go against Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) which is recent and no theory has been able to defeat it so far. So not going against the theory of Piaget and Vygotsky we can provide admission to the one who has not been through formal schooling. I see no problem there. You can see some such examples. Bal Krishna Sama didn’t have formal schooling more than I Sc but Tribhuvan University awarded him with PhD degree. Many people have done PhD on his works and life. So, I claim it can be done…
Researcher: The case of Bal Krishna Sama was unique. He was an outstanding personality, recognizing his outstanding ability and contribution he was awarded. Here the question is whether we should develop a mechanism where all Nepalese could have an opportunity to test their knowledge and skill and get certified and open up avenue for lifelong learning and continuing education?
Respondent: You raised a very good issue. The nation has to provide this opportunity to get his/her knowledge and skills certified. I agree with this point. We have to develop such mechanism to identify the knowledge and skill of an individual. If s/he is interested and ready to take the test then the nation has to provide this opportunity. But it has to done on the basis of cognition and social constructivism.
In order to develop a mechanism we need to do piloting from the parameter of equity-in-diversity. I think the result of piloting will be good. Observing the international practices I can claim that it is possible and will have multiple advantages. It will increase rate of return and employability. Furthermore it will reduce the cost drastically.
Researcher: What can we do to motivate people for lifelong learning and continuing education? For example, how can we make the people of all profession for example teacher, doctor, engineer, etc. enthusiastic to update his/her knowledge?
Respondent: We have to recognize skills and knowledge at first. The state and the immediate colleague have to recognize it. In selection process the state has to give choice. There should be right man in right place. The tendency of recognizing and putting right man in right place has not been established in Nepal so far. There is nepotism, favoritism and sycophancy in the country. People’s knowledge should be recognized and given them choice for proper job placement. Recognition will preserve and foster local and indigenous knowledge and skills.
The education system has been undergoing through the process full of discrimination. There is frustration even in formal schooling. Only a handful number of people have got advantages. People have not been in the right place according to their ability and interest. Formal schooling itself is in such limbo. So the condition in the case of informal and non-formal is very pathetic. That’s why there is conflict and the state has become fragile. On the perspective of equity-in-diversity the state has to give intervention only then it can give good results.
Researcher: Please make me further clear on how we can adjust informal and non-formal learners in the job market.
Respondent: In our Three-Year Interim Plan a little is talked on this regard. But it hasn’t taken the three forms of learning in an equal footing as we have been taking it now. The state has given less emphasis to less formal learning. This year’s government policy and budge didn’t give required importance. It will certainly increase conflict. For solving this, employability has to be ensured for non-formal and informal learning. There is challenge in education system. The state is not clear in philosophy of education system. Political parties do not have consensus in the type of education system. One (a political party) talks about pro-people education (janabadi sikshya) but it seems rather blur as no modalities have been so far postulated. That’s why we don’t have to spread big hopes to the people. As claimed by Earnest Hemingway ‘little is beautiful’. Let’s start from small things by piloting. Everybody needs to be made clear on this. Gradually it has to be increased. In the plan, policy and program it has to be inculcated. As per the interest and need of the people of diversified background we can give programs to the people no matter whether they are of Himal, Pahad or Tarai.
Researcher: Sir, let me ask you a specific question. If a person has come informally and accredited and certified equivalent to the B A level, can we allow them to fight for Section Officer as per the provision of Public Service Commission?
Respondent: Yes, we can. If he or she has the competency required by the state s/he should be allowed. There are 5-7 competences discussed by the scholar Morgan. If s/he is tested and deserves that competency it will not weaken and harm the nation. I claim it will be more advantageous to the nation. It makes the nation stronger. The system of reservation will ruin the nation as it never provides environment conducive for enhancing the competence of its citizens. However the competence is acquired, it could be either through non-formal or informal, if s/he deserves the competence s/he be allowed. But I again repeat the system of reservation is harmful to the nation.
Researcher: Can we list out all the knowledge, skill and competence that could be acquired through three modes of learning and keep them under a single structure?
Respondent: We don’t need to keep them in the same frame. But I am not telling that it is difficult to keep them in a single structure. Let them come from whatever mode is viable for them. We have no problem from where they come, what we need is competent human-power. We don’t care the tree of mango while selecting mango fruit, just we need sweet mango. I think I made you clear.
Researcher: Sir, thank you very much for giving me time despite your busy schedule.