R Chandrasoma

Education as a training in skills useful in adult life is widely accepted as a prime reasonƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  for schooling the young. Thus, the study of arithmetic and the aquistion of basic literary abilities among schoolchildren are seen as preparationsƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  for the successful accomplishment of duties and tasks that all adults must face.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  However, there is another – some would say a more important ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” aspect of education that is ignored in this time-honoured approach. The basic thrust of education – of the young and the old alike – ought to be cognitive training – which is to say the adaptive shaping of the mind to reason and think in dealing with life’s multifarious problems.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  Let us give an example – in the study of mathematics, young pupils are taught the ‘PrimeƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  Number Theorem’ of Euclid. This exercise has, arguably, no worth whatsoever as preparatory training for a life-skill – but it does challenge the young mind and sharpens and re-frames its approach to problems in a very general setting. It makes the mind grow in strength and reach. The mind at any age stultifies if this kind of challenge is absent. Indeed. recent research has overturned the myth that one’s IQ (innate Intelligence) is a genetic bequeathal that remains fixed for life. The mind (and its physical basis, the brain) are continuously modified by experience. There is no need to add that if this experience is repetitive, stereotyped and unchallenging, the brain – which is the physical basis of the mind – remains much as it was in its early formative years.

We have noted that this approach is well recognized by educators with respect to children of school-going age – that what isƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  taught is a shaping rather than a training. Romantic verse and Latin Grammar – if these are learned at school – are like push-ups in physical exercise. Their value lies in ‘shaping’ the system for enhanced performance. Consider, now, the situation adults face – when they leave school and have long forgotten Euclid and romantic poetry.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  Have they ‘finished’ their education in any real sense? In the light of what we have said above, to answer in the affirmative is not only foolish – it is woefully destructive at both the individual and the social level. The greater part of the life of an individual is spent as an adult and to deny education in a real and substantial sense to this leading cohort of humanity is a social disaster. Yet this is, in broad outline true of the situation in our country and in most parts of the world. The great contemporary revolution is in entertainment and communication – of the trivial kind epitomized in such things as the Mobile Phone and the TV display. While it is not true of everyone, is it not fair to say that intellectual laziness has been promoted in an age when our faculties should be at their keenest? Are we to believe that our brains have been ‘overloaded’ through syllabuses and exams and no longer need training?ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  Whatever the old thinking on this subject, it is now a proven fact that ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”¹…”neurogenesis’ ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” the dynamical refashioning of the synaptic connections of the brain – continues into advanced old age and is vital to stave off dangerous dementias such as Alzheimer’s Disease. We need intellectual challenges in all phases and times of life’s troublesome journey to stay alive and healthy. These observation lead to our central theme – that whatever the merits (and demerits) of our school and university systems, we in Sri Lanka are in the backwoods so far as adult education is concerned. How is the quality of this ‘quarternary’ education to be improved? Not, of course by sending adults back to school but by creating an informal ‘virtual school’ through the revolutions in communication that characterize our age. Let us be specific. Why are English radio broadcasts in Sri Lanka so jejune and childish in their content? Is music the be-all and end all of public broadcasting? Are religious sermons and broadcasting (of which we have a surfeit) educational? Must seriousness and intellectual challenge be avoided because of perceived offense to some sectarian group? Why do intellectuals (if any) fail to participate in public discourse over Radio and TV in this country? So far as TV is concerned, we are in the sad position of Advertisers and Sponsors dictating the content of Television programmes – a sure guarantee of intellectual decadence even if the moral issues of stereotyping are ignored. We have, in short sacrificed brains for visceral titilation and dumbed down all that is presented in the belief thatƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  public discourse must be soporific and uncontroversial if it is to win acceptance. Political broadcasting alone raises blood-pressure – but this genre can hardly be regarded as food for the intellect.

It remains to say a few things about books – in an earlier age the symbol of learning. It is now a rare sight for an adult to be seen with a book in a public place – although fifty years ago this was commonplace. The replacement of English by the vernacular was not a simple switch to a new mode of communication – it changed the ethos of approaches to self-development. In reading in English there is the challenge of a world that entrances and spurs the reader to intellectual adventure. There is no such challenge in the native languages imbued with a tradition of obedience and pliant acceptance. It is difficult to underestimate the profound impact this has had on our national psyche. As repeatedly pointed out by the President of our country, bilingualism is the answer – but let us admit that fluent bilingualism is a rare skill that few in contemporary Sri Lanka have.