Happy Teachers’ Day : Listen to Your Students
Karl Marx did not articulate a specific concept of the university or college, but he certainly envisioned a holistic way of life in a communist society: “where a person can hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, and criticise after dinner.” It is safe to infer that Marx was an early proponent of holistic education. Dr S. Radhakrishnan, whose birthday on September, 5 is annually celebrated as Teacher’s Day, defined education as a process that must be holistic and aimed at the balanced development of the individual. Radhakrishnan taught at Oxford University and the University of Calcutta. He also served as Vice-Chancellor of Banaras Hindu University and the University of Calcutta before becoming Vice-President and later President of India. He laid the foundation stone of the University Kashmir.
A Giant of a Professor
Prime Minister Nehru appointed Radhakrishnan as Ambassador to the Soviet Union replacing his own sister which raised doubts among many: what would a Vedanta scholar do in the land of Karl Marx? As President of India, Radhakrishnan visited China, met Chairman Mao Zedong, and even patted Mao on the cheek. Mao responded, “What do you do when a foreign president treats you not as a threat but as a student?” Observing Mao’s startled expression, Radhakrishnan reassured him: “Mr. Chairman, don’t be alarmed. I did the same thing to Marshal Stalin and the Pope.”
When the British government recommended him for knighthood, the Viceroy, Lord Irwin, consulted the Governor of Bengal (as Radhakrishnan was then teaching at Calcutta University). The reply was telling: “All police reports are against him, but I like him.”
As Ambassador, Radhakrishnan divided his time, spending half the year teaching at Oxford, though he was often irritated by diplomatic protocol. One can imagine his embarrassment—perhaps even humiliation—at being addressed as “Honourable Vice-Chancellor”. The finest tribute to his memory is to reflect on some of the pressing challenges facing higher education in India today.
The Fundamental Challenge
The central challenge confronting higher education is the pursuit of excellence. The rigid classroom structures and conventional modes of teaching undermine this goal. University and college leaders must return to the drawing board to identify the root causes of the present crisis in the teaching–learning environment.
The over-reliance on traditional classroom teaching—the hallmark of the “factory model”—subverts the goal of holistic student development. This outdated approach, privileging mass production over creativity, must be replaced by models that are innovative and forward-looking.
The Factory Model
The roots of this model lie in the colonial framework of education in the Indian subcontinent. The colonial state sought to produce a class of professionals capable of maintaining the machinery of governance. While this system did contribute to early nation-building, it entrenched a rigid, control-oriented approach.The colonial aim was not to foster intellectual agility but to produce disciplined workers. After independence, Indian academia inherited not only the infrastructure but also the attitudes of this outdated system. We continue to equate 24/7 guidance with quality education, seven hours of classroom teaching with learning, and one-way lectures with genuine engagement. This directly undermines self-reliant thinking and authentic self-realisation. In short, the factory model remains at odds with established pedagogical thought.
Pedagogical Theory
The more things change, the more they remain the same. Subject divisions remain rigid and artificial, creating lopsided learning experiences. Historically, great centres of learning—Nalanda in the 7th century and Cambridge in the 17th—embraced an integrated view of knowledge.
Modern educational theory reinforces this. Jean Piaget, the Swiss psychologist, advocated student-centred learning, where knowledge is actively constructed rather than passively absorbed. Lev Vygotsky, the Russian psychologist, emphasized the socio-cultural dimension of learning, highlighting collaborative and interactive environments. Paulo Freire, the Brazilian theorist, critiqued the “banking model” of education, in which teachers merely deposit knowledge into passive students. He instead called for a participatory, problem-solving approach.
Together, these thinkers underscore that learning is context-rich, socially mediated, and deeply self-directed. Yet the factory model inverts this vision: teachers become preachers, students become factory workers, and universities function as manufacturing units.
Pitfalls of the Model
1.Loss of Joy in Learning
Students are constrained by rigid schedules, often from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., leaving little time for reflection, group discussion, or independent reading. Self-learning—crucial for intellectual growth—is neglected. Students are denied the freedom to pursue their passions. As one scholar has observed, “passionpreneurship” is key to unlocking hidden potential.
- Infantilisation of Learners
By discouraging initiative and autonomy, the system undermines students’ maturity and capacity for self-regulation. The assumption that teachers are the sole repositories of knowledge leads to rushed deadlines and superficial course completion. Freire called this the “banking model,” where teachers deliver fixed content rather than co-learning with students. This contradicts the mission of universities, which is to cultivate independent thinkers.
- Negative Impact on Teachers and Students
The system fails both groups. Students suffer health issues such as cervical and back pain from long, uninterrupted classes. Teachers—only a minority of whom possess effective communication skills—become exhausted and demotivated. Creativity is stifled on both sides. Simply put, the human body was not designed to sit hunched in one place for seven hours a day.
Way Forward
- Cultural Transformation
Institutional culture plays a decisive role in shaping learning ecosystems. Universities require a shift in mindset, behaviour, and entrenched practices—an adaptive challenge that demands collective leadership. As Peter Drucker famously remarked, “Culture eats strategy for breakfast.” Cultural transformation is essential to align institutional vision, mission, and values with the needs of society. Resistance from entrenched leadership remains a major obstacle, as evidenced by the limited success of the New Education Policy in expanding student opportunities.
- Learning from the Best
Institutions should emulate centres of innovation and excellence. IIT Madras, for example, has fostered a culture of entrepreneurship, producing over 370 start-ups with a combined valuation of ₹47,000 crores. Its incubation cell aspires to launch 100 start-ups annually, while its practice of filing one patent per day illustrates a culture of creativity and accountability. Regular student feedback on faculty performance further strengthens its learning ecosystem. The newly established Rekhi Centre of Excellence for the Science of Happiness seeks to integrate scientific research with philosophical inquiry, helping students cultivate positivity, build emotional resilience, and lead purposeful lives.
By contrast, many institutions indulge in the rhetoric of innovation without delivering substantive results.
- The Sanyal Thesis
Economist Sanjeev Sanyal, a member of the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council, argues that artificial intelligence will transform higher education by automating lectures and enabling students to learn at their own pace, guided by the world’s best professors. This shift will compel universities to focus more on research and collaborative projects. While acknowledging the enduring role of human interaction in fields such as surgery and the humanities, Sanyal emphasizes the urgent need for reinvention and reimagination.
This is the proverbial writing on the wall. One of the shortest paths to meaningful reform is to listen to students and create classrooms that are non-judgemental and egalitarian.
Conclusion
The transformation of higher education is not simply about curriculum design, competencies, or skills. It requires a fundamental rethinking of classroom management, teacher–student relationships, institutional culture, and core values. Only by moving beyond the factory model can universities nurture independent thinkers, foster creativity, and build a citizenry capable of meeting future challenges.
The days of narcissistic, isolated glory for universities are long over. The successful university of tomorrow must be both innovative and deeply philosophical. In Ernest Hemingway’s The Sun Also Rises, a character is asked how he went bankrupt. He replies: “Gradually, and then suddenly.” That may well be the fate of universities that resist change and ignore the writing on the wall.
Professor Gull Mohammad Wani is a Kashmir-based political scientist and Honorary Senior Fellow at the Centre for Multilevel Federalism, New Delhi.
