After almost eight decades since independence, the state of India’s school education remains in complete disarray. Though a significant number of children of school-going age have been herded into schools, the learning levels remain dismal in spite of very low bars set to assess them. In this situation, there is a wholesale push for edtech by the cartel of Capital and ‘non-profits’ (funded by Capital), with the State providing a massive boost for the commercialisation and privatisation of schools. While education will be a casualty, this policy promises savings for the State and profits for Capital.
Making Sense of the Present Moment of ‘Onlinisation’ of Teaching
If education is more than merely offering ‘content’, online education is very far from a serious teacher’s idea of reasonable education. Among other things, it ignores the role of the peer group in collective learning; the role of social diversity in learning; the importance of providing students equal access to institutional resources; the scope for students to escape socio-political fetters and the disadvantages of their ‘homes’ by physically entering a place of learning; and the importance of beyond-classroom learning in the collective life of a physical institution. The actual results of online learning have been dismal. Yet, instead of training more teachers, lowering the costs of higher education and widening its reach, the emphasis is on making education a commercial commodity.
Indian Telecom’s Spectacular Rise and the Nature of Monopoly Capital in India
Votaries of the prevailing policies extol India’s private corporate sector for spreading mobile telephony widely, at low prices. This article looks behind this low price. It finds a history of State subsidies and gifts to the private corporate sector. After a phase of chaotic and wasteful development by private firms engaging in resource capture and speculation, began a phase of concentration into just two or three giant firms, through the massive use of finance. Despite these vast resources, these firms have failed to build a domestic technological base, and remain heavily import-dependent. The author uses this example to provide insights into what he calls ‘Indian monopoly capital’.