Encourage thought, not cramming

DC Sharma   

Class X results of the CBSE are alarming. Learners are in no way encouraged. They are rather put into a dark tunnel leading to unemployment. Parents whose children have scored less find faults with their wards. Who would tell the creativity of their wards was growing wings?

The 100 per cent score of 1,820 students in English communication and of 24 in English language and literature is no guarantee these students can speak English that well. Our evaluation system should check the rot of cramming that has stolen the show.  

I think of my own bitter experience at the Central Institute of English and Foreign Languages (CIEFL), Hyderabad. I was selected by the UGC for training to bring communicative English course classes to Himachal Pradesh in 1995. It took me 36 hours to reach Hyderabad from Kangra. Dead-tired, I was at the CIEFL gate where a tall but simple-looking gatekeeper was on duty. I asked him in Hindi to show me the way to the hostel office. The effective English in which he replied stunned me. Even before attending the training I realised that such a practice was what our students needed, and not cramming methods to score high.

Why do our talented and intelligent students who score 100 per cent fail when they try for a befitting career? They can’t face the written tests and viva voce. They can only cram well. They are hit hard when they have to use the language part. Every language has two aspects to be dealt with. One is the written part and the other spoken. Even an English child learns to speak the language first and then learns to write it. But in India it is the other way. That’s why our children can neither write nor speak that well. Why is a student who tries to write in his own language discouraged? He needs to be encouraged and evaluators must realise it.

Why even in history, political science, economics, psychology, etc. should full marks be awarded? Where is the chance left for them to develop their creativity in that case? During evaluation, the proper and effective language use of skills in learning English are ignored. It’s a mockery of the evaluation system. What a harmful tilt!

Evaluation is treated as a testing ritual. It is a sacred duty. Why not help build good careers? Why should an examiner sit like an eagle to pick and choose the stuff of one’s own liking? 

Improvement in learning comes when flaws are pointed out. That helps learners to improve. Don’t these examiners throw the evaluation yardstick to the winds? While preparing students for better jobs, we already show them that they deserve 100 per cent. The craving for the appetite to learn more must be kept intact. That alone will help students and check the rot in evaluation.