The concept of nationalism has seen rising significance since the second world war with its evolving understanding in postcolonial countries and modern forms of conflict. In the South Asian context particularly the concepts of nation and nationalism have been frequently analysed as underlying the political and everyday discourses. Through this article, I aim at exploring the conceptualisation of nation and nationalism, along with social cohesion, religion, secularism and globalisation in the National Curriculum Frameworks of India and Pakistan, how these understandings are different, specifically in the shared events on the independence struggle and partition.
Why does nationalism matter in curriculum?
Nationalism, nation-state and national identity are crucial topics in the contemporary world, with borders and national identities becoming more and more defined with conflict, migration and pandemics. Curriculum, as it always has been, is more than ever becoming important as a political and pedagogic ground of exerting political control. In attempts to change the curriculum, historical events are the first to reshape.
Unlike older European nation-states, most South Asian countries gained nation-statehood rather recently, gaining independence from colonial restraints and emerging from violent and nonviolent nationalist ovements. Postcolonial nations in South Asia continue to be active sites of nation creation as emerging nation-states, split internally by contentious colonial governmentalities. (Durrani and Navani, 2020) Education has been considered an essential institution used in South Asian contexts to develop cohesive national identities and a difference from the “other.” The history curriculum is essential for developing a “national collective self concept” and educating “successive generations about the frontiers of the national community” and its relationship to the “other” (Durand and Kaempf 2014, 333, as cited in Durrani et. al, 2020).
As Apple (2003) argues, education is intertwined with politics of culture, and hence curriculum and knowledge in any given context, here, in these nations is not neutral but a part of a “selective tradition” which falls in line with someone’s vision and selection. It is produced out of the cultural, political, and economic conflicts, tensions, and compromises that organize and disorganize people. (Apple, 2003) This can be seen in the post-independence South Asian countries who have developed institutions and frameworks for a centralized or common curriculum.
What differs in the curriculum in India and Pakistan of shared history?
In India and Pakistan, the freedom movement and Partition prove to be contentious and difficult subjects given the history of the two countries. Kumar says that this is proven by the lack of informed knowledge of the other and how powerful preconceptions have reduced scholarly curiosity and serious inquiry. In both countries, the freedom movement proves to be an important lesson about national values. The Pakistani narrative is driven by a sense of self-protection and escape, which is seen as the foundation of the national ethos and building up of the nation-state. In India, on the other hand, this narrative highlights the tolerance of various groups for one another throughout the course of an idealised and varied history.
Abbas (2011) highlights that there are certain characters that both side pick as vehicles of the ideal who helped the countries gain freedom from the British and establish their nationhood. She states that according to Kumar, government and nationalist historians, use the school textbook to prepare patriotic individuals willing and able to perpetuate the prejudices that led to the division of the two states in the first place. While Pakistani literature portrays Mahatma Gandhi as a Hindu leader, the literature in India pays little attention to the evolution of the demands of the Muslim League.
Kumar traces the history of the two nations to the point of Partition, which he states is the end of History in Indian textbooks, and the start of History in Pakistan. He emphasizes that there were in fact, two distinct movements, one of which resulted in the independence of India and the other in the formation of Pakistan. Partition is portrayed in Indian textbooks as a sad, tragic, and maybe avoidable conclusion, on the other hand, in Pakistani school textbooks it is seen as a celebratory event.
What do education policy documents say about nationalism and social cohesion in these countries?
NCFs can be viewed as a blueprint that represents a wide consensus amongst various mediating political factions on the goals of school education (for specific or all school levels), the broad subject matter, and the pedagogical style, it is expected to bring synchronisation across a nation’s federating units in terms of how school experience is organised among mainstream schools in their jurisdictions. At various points in time, the three countries entrusted the job of drafting and/or approving NCFs to national autonomous authorities, committees, or councils. From a review of curricular documents and relevant literature, it can be said that the question of developing a national identity for achieving “cohesion” is a central axis in the curriculum policy landscape in the three countries. (Sharma, 2020)
Sharma (2020) notes that the issue of education and national identity has received far greater empirical attention in each country as well as in the relevant comparative literature. Social science textbooks, particularly history textbooks, are the focus of such studies. These works attempt to understand how parallel narrative constructions centred on shared moments and phenomena (such as the liberation fight, partition, wars, religion, and citizenship) are integrated in social science or history textbooks (Crook 1996; Durrani and Dunne 2010; Joshi 2010; Kumar 2001; Rosser 2003). The implicit objective is to present a political “other” or “enemy” in order to construct a national identity (Saigol 2005). Durrani et al. (2020) and Durrani and Nawani (2020) have gone into great length about this literature (2020). Such studies provide complex insights into how national curricula and textbooks are not neutral, and how they remain relational in terms of holding on to shared history in order to build a different present and future. (Sharma 2020)
Conclusion
This piece started out with the aim of understanding nation, nationalism and social cohesion as crucial concepts in the contemporary world. This was done because these ideas have become more critical and more defined conflict, migration and presently, pandemics. For this exercise, it was first understood that education plays an imperative role and is deeply intertwined with politics, policy, culture, and history of a given place. Place is an important word here, as it is crucial to understand how nations, states, and countries differ in terms of their meanings, and hence it was concluded that India and Pakistan, the subjects of this study, involve themselves in nation building exercises. It was seen that nation building exercises and enterprises are important for postcolonial states to assert their identity. This assertion is increasingly important in a globalised world, and hence, from the past twenty years of the increasing impact of globalisation, National Curriculum Frameworks of 2000 and 2005 of India and the very new National Curriculum Framework 2018 of Pakistan were studied. An interesting point emerges here and that is of building oneself up against the constructed “other” where one country sees the other as the subordinate. This is observable in popular culture as well, whether its cricket matches considered highly important or the display of patriotism louder than the other side at the Wagah border ceremonies. It becomes crucial to define oneself not only in a global world but more so against the other. There is also a tension between wanting to comply with global standards pursued by INGOs and international bodies to create global citizens who can participate in the global economy and at the same time preserve traditions and national identity. The latter results in wariness of the global agenda and emergence of nationalist groups and more extreme ideologies.
As mentioned, education is deeply historical and political. Education becomes the ground for attempts at implementations of global standards and to preserve national identity. Curriculum frameworks reflect this tension and according to who frames the document, reflect ideology. The scope of the study could only review existing literature on histories of India and Pakistan, as abundant work exists for the same, and aimed to contribute to the identified gap that exists in studying policy frameworks. However, as in the reviewed book Prejudice and Pride, Krishna Kumar argues, there has been a steady decline in the scholarship of the other country on each side.
Nipunika is a content creator, writer, poet, and podcaster with a background in Political Science and Education. They are passionate about understanding people, education, podcasts, and social media and the ways they can be used to bring about social transformation. They have a wide range of interests, from curriculum studies, comparative politics, early childhood care and education, artificial intelligence, gender and sexuality, mental health, and intersectional feminism. https://www.linkedin.com/in/nipunika-sachdeva/
