Impact of Draft NEP 2019 on Social Sciences with a focus on Psychology
Impact of Draft National Education Policy (NEP) 2019 on Social Sciences focusing on Psychology
In lay terms, the discipline of Psychology is the scientific study of the human mind and its functions. When analysing the Draft NEP in the lens of a PhD scholar, I believe there are a three aspects of the draft's policies that impact my discipline.
Firstly, if we look at Chapter 11 of the Draft NEP, "Towards a More Liberal Education" it refers to a survey done on world famous scientists, the results reveal that they are three times more likely than the average scientist to have an artistic hobby. The Draft also says: "Engineering schools such as the IITs must move towards a more liberal education integrating arts and humanities, while arts and humanities students must aim to learn more science." It proposes that specialisation in chosen discipline(s) must be accompanied by a broad-based education. It suggests a common core curriculum for all students, which, among other things, should aim to develop "critical thinking (e.g. courses on statistics, data analysis, or quantitative methods); communication skills (e.g. courses on writing and speaking); aesthetic sensibilities (e.g. courses in music, visual art, or theatre); scientific temper." This could be advantageous and also challenging at the same time. It would be advantageous as this would hopefully widen a Pure Science academic by equipping them with awareness and understanding of human behaviour. This would be helpful in understanding human relationships (building and maintaining them). Engineering and IITs mostly focus on linear in-depth studies of Sciences, hence I believe as a scholar of Psychology, it would help future Scientists by broadening their view point. The disadvantage I see in this is cognitive bias. I agree with Sandipan Deb, in his article at Livemint, where he talks about scientific temper (a way of life which uses scientific methods for decision making). He mentions, "… it's very important to realise that scientific temper is not an automatic product of studying science." And that "…political ideology trumps scientific temper."[1] It would be challenging to inculcate scientists with scientific temper when academia could have cognitive bias (that affects decision making and judgement). He also mentions that students have been subjected to institutionalised lack of viewpoint diversity and hence this will almost certainly lead to cognitive bias.
Secondly, the objective of Chapter 14 of the NEP says, "Catalyse and energise research and innovation across the country in all academic disciplines, with a special focus on seeding and growing research at universities and colleges - create a conducive ecosystem for research through competitive peer-reviewed funding, mentoring, and facilitation." The NEP has expressed concern that India spends only around 0.69 per cent of its GDP in research and innovation whereas countries such as the US (2.8 per cent), China (2.1 per cent) and Israel (4.3 per cent) spend a much higher proportion of their GDP in research. The NRF has set up four major divisions — sciences, technology, social sciences and arts and humanities. This will hopefully aim to catalyse and energize research and development especially in the field of Social Sciences and so with Psychology. Much R&D has been done and is known to have been done in other scientific disciplines. However, R&D in Psychology per se has never been highlighted with possible reasons being that it is just a tiny sub division of Medical Sciences. The mental health field is just a minute speck within the vast domain of Medical or Social Sciences. As a research scholar I believe there should be a shift in focus towards R&D in mental health(Psychology). More research done in mental health and well-being along with a focus on interventions and models with respect to the Indian population or working population could bring about positive changes in human output. In 2016-17, the national expenditure on research and development in Higher Education Sector was 3989 crores a slight increase from 3664 crores in 2015-16 (Department of Science & Technology)[i]. The expenditure on R&D by the Indian Council of Medical Research in 2014-15 was 843 crores a slight increase from 840.42 in 2013-14 (Department of Science & Technology)[ii]. These increases show that there is gradual progress, however, we are still yet to ascertain if this will impact Psychology. Therefore, it is important that current Policy makers focus and make R&D in mental health and well-being a priority for Human Development.
Last but not the least, the University Grants Commission (UGC) has mandated that by 2021, all university Assistant Professors should hold a PhD or should be enrolled in the programme. This decision by the UGC has increased the demand for PhD enrolments. This would therefore, increase the number of PhD graduates that could lead to a saturation of Doctorates looking for employment opportunities. The Draft NEP in Chapter 9 states its objective of, "Revamping the Higher Education System, create world class education institutions across the country – increase GER to at least 50% by 2035". The Draft aims to create employment opportunities consisting of skilled jobs of a creative and multidisciplinary nature. This could hopefully fill the gap of increasing PhD graduates from all disciplines.
In conclusion, the discipline of Psychology within social sciences and liberal arts education should be included as interdisciplinary programs within pure Sciences (in Higher Education). Secondly, Policy makers should understand the importance of mental health and well-being by allocating more funds from the NRF to promote R&D in Psychology. Lastly, there is 'light at the end of the tunnel' for aspiring Professors of HEIs as promised by the Draft NEP of 2019 with respect to employment opportunities.
Comments
Post a Comment