Hold your peace forever?

24 10 2015

Some thoughts on the recent student suicides at IIT Madras, and the debate on mental health that followed.

IIT Madras had witnessed two suicides during the last couple of months. Apparently, these unfortunate incidents have no common denominators except the decision to end one’s own life. The shocks from the incidents did incite some serious discussions on mental health within the campus and among the larger stake holders, especially the alumni. As often as they turn out to be, this time too the exchanges in social media and newspaper were filled with bitterness.  I hate to say this on the eve of every major incident from the campus, but the reactions from both sides to me, appear too far fetched, although definitely not in equal terms. I fully concur with the requirement of sensitisation and debate on this matter. As pointed out in the article in ‘The Hindu’ certain gargantuan moralist fossils that have long stayed and become a rigid part of the system should be placed in the museums, from where they could be marvelled by glorious past enthusiasts at a safe distance. But having agreed on these, I do find some of the generalisations in the absence of adequate data problematic. On the other hand, I find  Khap panchayats in favour of preserving the institute honour, who have time and again used this policing tactic to extinguish the scope of the debates  or attempted to put the blame squarely on people who dared to speak out, much more deplorable and offensive.

Do we have a problem?

I have read that during the period of Raj, the designated purpose of an English grammar school was to remove every bit of tenderness from young boys, so as to  prepare them to become foot soldiers for the imperial enterprise. Every other aspect of the imperial education was tied to this aim. Unsurprisingly, even sports. As the eminent writer and historian Ramachandra Guha had pointed out in his LSE lecture:

Cricket, wrote Christopher Douglas, the biographer of the controversial English cricketer Douglas Jardine, is a game that teaches its pupils to be “honest, impervious to physical pain, uncomplaining and civilised”. In the introductory words of Professor Michael Cox- it’s a game that turned “lads into chaps, chaps into men, and men into gentlemen”. These are sensibilities supremely English, and cricket, surely, the supreme English sport.

 The colonial enterprise has long withdrawn from India, but again unsurprisingly, our education system still embeds the ghost from that era. In my opinion the stout refusal to acknowledge the problem of mental health in professional education, and create workable, self evolving systems in place comes from the very idea of “ideal engineer” or “professional” who has no place for “weaknesses”. The question is not whether students of professional courses should be prepared to handle stress – both academic and personal, which all reasonable people would agree that they should be, but the kind of coping mechanisms to be promoted and systems to be put in place.  Unfortunately, the professional institutes in our country, even the elite clubs like IIT’s, have not moved far from the 70’s thinking in the western world. In short, we are at least 40 years behind the world universities in dealing with mental health issues. 

Much worse is the false sense of pride inculcated in the alumni of this exclusive club, who more often than not, are completely privilege blind so much so as to attribute their superhuman qualities to their success, as against a realistic assessment. The problem with the IIT system, in my opinion, is that very often otherwise competent people, who are probably less strong mentally or have different requirements, get crushed under the weight of the system. And since we do not have to talk about them most of the time, all is well and hallelujah! This survivorship bias, unfortunately, has become the hallmark of the dominant discourse, and this is very much a part of the problem.

The Academic part

In my opinion, the root of the problem is not the competitive nature of the programme. Of course, I do believe that relative grading is not a very good idea under most circumstances. Even software companies have started to move away from relative assessment in appraisals. Academic stress for some part is inevitable in any system, although the option for self-paced programmes and giving more electives from the third year onwards can handle some aspects of this. The extraordinary attendance requirement, though not religiously followed by every faculty, in my opinion is a total nonsense. This only helps to protect incompetent faculty members, and never students. This is also a burden shifting, wherein the important duty of an undergraduate teacher to make the subject interesting and engage the students is transferred to the students, who in the process are penalised for having bad teachers.

It is unrealistic to expect every student to perform well in any given course or project. The principle should be to positively reward the ones who do well and put effort.  The disinterested should be allowed to scrape through with an average grade, given that a certain required minimum level of conceptual understanding and/or effort is demonstrated. Very often, this required minimum is not made clear at the outset, and this lack of proper information results in frustration and unnecessary stress. The delays and extensions in the final year project have very often been the reasons for suicides during the past. IIT Madras has taken note of the issue and now has a provision to substitute B.Tech project with courses, which is a good start. In any case, I have felt that there is a certain lack of transparency in some project evaluations. This is not to make any insinuations of personal vendetta or arbitrariness as such from my part, although there have been hearsays of such nature, but only to suggest that it is certainly possible to tell students at the outset as to what is required.

The Human part

Living inside a huge campus, especially during the most vibrant as well as impressionable years of one’s life brings in the question of dealing with human relations. It is an inescapable fact that campus dwellers exist in a web of relationships from platonic friendships to romantic love of hetero or/and homo varieties. This is exactly where the system in place is so fragile and conservative. Even when there are many aware and compassionate faculty members and supportive peers, the culture of frowning and refusal to acknowledge continues. The prevailing  conservatism is  often suffocating to someone who might not have any relationship issues at all, as I have felt many a times while listening to some younger friends. Of course, IITM is still three notches above the private colleges in South, by and large, in this regard. But the more relevant question is whether one would like a national institute to be compared with pathetic moral policing ones from the state, in the same breath. I have heard from friends that the counselling and guidance unit, for all the good work they do, lack a non-judgemental approach towards relationship issues. This simple fact, if true, alienates many a people who need real help.  The alleged use of students as some sort of information gatherers or even spies, can only make things worse. In my opinion, such moves are reprehensible and displays a kind of colonial hangover.

On top of the relationship questions, there is the issue of perceptions. This is the way-too-dangerous-zone which is almost unmanageable. Particularly vulnerable are the perceptions about caste and gender. The general perception about most Dalit students by the upper caste ones is pathetically prejudiced, not to mention completely wrong. The language in which it comes out is often very covert, but the under tones are easily distinguishable. I have had personal encounters with these prejudices as a teaching assistant in a basic engineering course. The same goes about gender relations. Young men generally believe that women have it easy, quite unreasonably,  and are so cocksure about their superiority. The question of LGBT is frowned up on, and some, both from students and faculty, are openly hostile.

Personally, I know the dynamics that goes on only too well. Having graduated from an NIT (or Regional Engineering College, as it were when we had joined) a decade ago, which too had a similar mix of population and a highly skewed sex ratio, I understand the popular perceptions in such a high testosterone campus. Trust me, they are far from reality by any yard stick of reasonability! It took me a few years to realise the mistake in perceptions about gender relations and even the elephant inside the room- caste. This is as much applicable to faculty as students. I believe that given the situation, sensitisation is the only way forward. But a systematic mechanism should be in place to make sure that this is done along with the academic orientation during the first weeks of the class. In fact, it is high time that we think about coming up with a systematic regime for sensitising on  gender, sexuality and caste prejudices.

Way forward..?

To be frank, we do not, as yet, know the extend of the problem. It is beyond me to speculate about any all weather solution too. But if anything, the discussions should begin. The naysayers and honour brigade might go on with their usual businesses of personal attacks and questioning intend, but it is also important to bring them to the table. It is absolutely unfortunate that some otherwise well meaning people have interpreted the debate, to put it mildly, as a mere perception difference between Humanities students and Engineering students. Not only is this kind of tagging ludicrous, but it does show a certain inability to engage with ideas and confuse them for people. As far as I have seen, this is a peculiar IIT Madras problem, where many engineering or science students (even faculty) have an unwarranted sense of intellectual supremacy. In fact, most these supremacists do not have any clue about the questions they address any more than a commonsensical grasp, which too is often wrong.

In any case, if you ask me, the first step in the right direction is to come with a speak out campaign. As a student and while inside the institution, nobody, for no reason, should be made to hold his/her peace forever. The institutions which are supposed to handle such issues should be asked to adhere to a completely non-judgemental approach. And we certainly do not need more moral policing, even if disguised in the security and safety jargon. Every student should realise that there is no worth in suffering in silence.




10 responses

24 10 2015

Why do you need to bring caste in everything? Not all issues revolve around it

24 10 2015

Was it suggested anywhere that everything revolves around caste?

Why should you get so upset when caste is even mentioned?

24 10 2015

Love the non-accusing tone of the article. One thing I would like to learn is how ordinary faculty members can help students. In my experience, students, by and large, don’t trust us. Small comments: (i) “The disinterested should be allowed to scrape through with an average grade, given that a certain required minimum level of conceptual understanding and/or effort is demonstrated.” Believe me, this happens I believe else the number of failures will go up significantly. (ii) Nice point about project evaluations.

24 10 2015

Thanks SG.

I do take your point. The “trust deficit” is real. But part of it can be dealt if students are also made comfortable to share some of their inhibitions.

For instance, it could be told in advance that “this course is important, but your life is much more”. In case, you have academic problems, here is what you should do. In case, you have personal issues, here is how you should proceed. In any case, while we shall not compromise on standards of evaluation, we can give you multiple options to choose your aim and a guidance towards how to proceed. Even if things does not go well, all is not lost……. I’m just thinking aloud. My ideas need not be fully workable too. But, the larger point on clarity and giving the information in advance should help.

25 10 2015

I agree with SG here, i am from elec dept and believe i managed to pass a 4th sem core course with C grade without knowing much about it (just using my JEE knowledge and i was completely disinterested in the course both due to the profs and due to the subject itself). In fact i believe (correct me if i am wrong) the guy who committed suicide surely didnt do it due to academic reasons.

25 10 2015

Also most of the articles published in major newspaper seem to point fingers toward the management and professors and there seems to be very little appreciation of their hard work. I think it is important that we dont blindly point fingers toward them and this isn’t surely going to help anyone’s cause (except for ppl trying to gain some attention).

25 10 2015

@IITM ( 🙂 )

You might notice that I have not put any square blame on faculty members as such. Like in all human endeavours, there are all sorts of people among the faculty members. It is purportedly wrong to paint everyone with the same brush. Also, I do not contest SG’s point on “leniency” as a rule. I was trying to allude to a different aspect. i.e. give clear information at the very outset. Possibly do a check during the midterm, and inform the ones who fare poorly in advance in a friendly tone. Give multiple options, even from that point, for these people might not anyway end up with an A or S. But it should be made possible for them to land up on a B or C with some well directed effort. Also, I believe the biggest problem is not emphasising on developing teaching skills. Generally speaking, an honest student will not be sad in getting an average grade from a very good teacher.

As far as I have heard, the last incident was not due to academic stress. But let us not discuss the particulars here. It would be unethical. My intention was to think aloud about the general issues at stake. It was an attempt to open up a debate.

24 10 2015

A very well balanced article devoid of hyperboles. This is not just the story of IITM or other IITs, for that matter,but the story of many campuses in India, possibly. Despite coming from an institute which is very small compared to the size of IITM (both in terms of student strength and area), I can relate to certain problems narrated in the article. Even when the students have counselors at their service and supportive and understanding teachers around, students often find it difficult to communicate in the fear of being judged. The social stigma around mental health (or the lack of it) is too overpowering. There was a discussion in my campus a few years back as the institute woke up to witness a suicide, second in a matter of two/three years. However, as time went, it all took a backseat. Although some individual teachers would show concern here and there, no proper redressal system emerged. We need to understand that every suicide is our collective responsibility. As the author rightly points out, the survivorship bias comes out as the dominant discourse, which is rather unfortunate. Apathy and alienation can only be countered with dialogues.

24 10 2015

I too know well that there is a “trust deficit” between students and the faculty, and that this is common to all institutes. Personally, I believe that mechanisms could be drawn out given that students do have some degree of trust with a few faculty members. If they can be engaged with such duties, as is already done in some places, but more often and systematically, a better communication channel can be established. But an essential prerequisite to this is to understand that trust is established only when the manner in which discussion on issues, private or otherwise, takes place is cordial, in an even plane and is non-judgemental. The privileged nature of such discussions should be mutually reciprocated. This is very often forgotten in a zeal to become the ‘saviour’. Very often personal ego kicks in.

I believe that what we need are not just good individual teachers. Without or without them, this has to be thought in terms of a system. In near future, many of our institutes shall become much larger in size than they were once envisaged to come to. This brings in greater challenges. In university, it should not be thought as similar to a primary school attention deficit problem.

24 10 2015

Completely agree with that.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: