Features
WILL TRUMP BE DISQUALIFIED FROM RUNNING IN 2024?
by Vijaya Chandrasoma
On August 19, University of Chicago Law Professor William Baude and University of St. Thomas Professor Michael Stokes Paulsen, both members of the right-wing Federalist Society, published a paper, to the effect that, “based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, if the public record is accurate, the case is not even close. Trump is no longer eligible to (run for) the office of the Presidency”.
At that time, this interpretation of the 14th Amendment was regarded by the media and the legal community as mere conjecture, with no real teeth to prevent Trump’s presidential candidacy.However, since then, there has been increasing momentum amongst the legal community, confirming the constitutional argument that Trump could be disbarred from the presidency.
The latest opinion came from Lawrence Tribe, Professor Emeritus of Constitutional Law at Harvard University, Founder of the American Constitution Society and deemed one of the nation’s foremost authorities on Constitutional Law.
Professor Tribe said on CNN’s State of the Union last Sunday: “The people who wrote the 14th Amendment were not fools. They realized that if those people who tried to overturn the country, who tried to get rid of our peaceful transitions of power are again put in power, that would be end of the nation, the end of democracy”.
Michael J. Luttig, one of the country’s best known conservative jurists and key adviser to former Vice-President Pence said, in an interview with the Washington Post, “250 years ago, we had a revolution against the king, created a new nation and a new Constitution to govern the nation…. The former president attempted to overturn an election that he had lost fair and square, incited the attack on January 6 in order to prevent the Joint Session (of Congress} from counting the electoral votes to determine the presidency of the United States of America”…. If he runs again, “Donald Trump, in the end, will be allowed to make a mockery out of the Constitution of the United States and the Rule of Law”.
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is a self-executing provision of the US Constitution, a provision that can be enforced without the aid of a legislative enactment, like a conviction.
“The former president’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, and the resulting attack on the US Capitol, place him squarely within the ambit of the disqualification clause, and he is therefore ineligible to serve as president ever again”, wrote Tribe and Luttig.
The final ruling will probably be determined by the Supreme Court, which gives Trump a 6/3 advantage. However, if the Justices rule not on Party lines but on a strict interpretation of the Constitution and their conscience, as they did on the 2020 election disputes, there is every chance that the majority of the Court will uphold the provisions of the 14th Amendment and rule that Trump is not qualified to run for or hold any public office in the United States in the future.
A lawsuit has already been filed by Noah Bookbinder, President of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), in Colorado which states: “Having disqualified himself from public office by violating Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, Donald Trump must be removed from the (Colorado State) ballot. January 6 was an unprecedented attack, exactly the kind of event, against which the framers of the 14th Amendment built such protections. You don’t break the glass unless there’s an emergency”.
With 13 months and four criminal trials to go before the November 2024 election, there will surely be many more lawsuits, filed by secretaries of state of Red and Blue states, to disqualify Trump from running.
Trump himself is currently providing the best evidence for his own disqualification with his post-arrest rantings, at TV interviews and campaign rallies. These may prove to be more effective than any legal interpretation of a constitutional amendment.
Trump is every prosecutor’s dream defendant, and every defense lawyer’s nightmare. He contradicts himself and admits to the many charges against him almost every time he opens his mouth at campaign rallies and interviews.
Last week, in an address at a Washington DC Pray Vote Stand summit, Trump stated that Joe Biden was “cognitively impaired” and would “lead the country into World War II if re-elected”. World War II ended in 1945. In the same speech, Trump said that he was “ahead of Obama in the 2024 election polls”, mixing up Presidents Obama and Biden. He also said that Obama was his opponent in 2016, “With Obama, we won an election that everyone said couldn’t be won”. Hillary Clinton was his opponent in 2016.
President Biden may be 80 years old, but compared to the mental and moral wasteland that is the 77 year-old Trump, he’s an intellectual giant, who gave a stirring oration at the United Nations General Assembly last week.
At an exclusive interview with Kristen Welker, aired on NBC Meet the Press on Sunday, September 17, Trump contradicted both himself and the positions taken by defense lawyers on numerous occasions. A few extracts:
He declined to answer the question posed by Ms. Welker on how he spent the afternoon of the insurrection on January 6, 2021. “I am not going to tell you. I’ll tell people later at an appropriate time”. Trump’s aides have already confirmed, under oath, that he had sequestered himself in a room off the Oval Office to watch the violence on TV. It took him 187 minutes to order the insurrectionists to stop the violence and to go home.
About the alleged fraudulent 2020 election, Trump said that “It was my decision, that the 2020 election was rigged, there was no question about it”. A statement in direct contradiction of his defense lawyers’ mendacious argument that he was merely going by the advice of his White House counsel, who convinced him that the election had been rigged.
In truth, his own Attorney General, William Barr, and many White House aides have already given evidence on oath that they had told Trump that there was no evidence of election fraud.
When asked about the mishandling of government top-secret documents stored at unsecured Mar a Lago locations, Trump said, “They were my documents. I could have fought them. I didn’t have to give them back” (to the National Archives). A total legal delusion. Those documents were the property of the US government.
When asked if he would testify to this effect, he said, “Sure, I’m going to – I’ll testify”. Trump’s defense lawyers will never let him get a mile near the witness box. He covers up one lie with another, he’ll be found guilty of perjury within minutes.
The impeachment of President Biden, proposed recently by Republican Speaker McCarthy, was based on minor charges against his son, Hunter. McCarthy also talked vaguely about “other high crimes” of the “Biden Crime Family” without a vestige of facts or evidence. He denies this is retaliation, the classic quid quo pro – “They did it to us, we do it to them”.
The Republican Congress recently accused the Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Department of Justice of showing a double standard in the treatment of the respective crimes of Hunter Biden and Donald Trump. Sure, there was a double standard. The crimes under investigation of Hunter Biden, private citizen, were three gun-related offences. The crimes of former President Trump, indicted, arrested and released on conditional bail, are espionage, sedition, obstruction of justice, sexual assaults and financial fraud. A ridiculous comparison. Apples and oranges, many, many rotten oranges.
Trump claimed that the Democratic Speaker Nancy Pelosi was somehow responsible for the January 6 insurrection. This statement is preposterous, even by Trump standards. Pelosi was one of the two main targets (the first being Vice-President Pence) of the insurrectionists. She did not have the authority to call for immediate Capitol Police and National Guard reinforcements to quell the violence. Only Trump did. And he didn’t, for 187 minutes, in spite of desperate calls from Vice-President Pence, Speaker Pelosi and Republican Minority House Leader McCarthy.
When asked about abortion rights, Trump said the Republican positions were “terrible”, though he held these same positions during his presidency. In fact, he once announced at a rally that Democrats allowed abortion after childbirth, a typically moronic statement, as such an act ceases to be abortion. Killing an infant is murder.
He now seeks to portray himself as a “deal maker”, making vague and confused comments on the “number of weeks after which he would ban abortion”, and whether it’s a decision that should be “left to the state or the federal government”. He is softening his stance on abortion because he has realized it’s going to be a major factor in the 2024 election.
Abortion is a decision to be made by the pregnant woman (or the parents, where relevant, of a pregnant minor) and her doctor. It is certainly not a decision for old white geezers, who barely know what an uterus is, who demand Victorian sexual morals of others, while being lecherously liberal of their own.
Special Counsel Jack Smith is seeking an order to prevent Trump from making inflammatory, intimidating and threatening remarks against witnesses, prosecutors and judges. “Through his statements, the defendant threatens to undermine the integrity of these proceedings and prejudice the jury pool”.
Trump has shown no signs of toning down his comments, even though his arrest and release were on conditional bail. He keeps repeating his lies that “the FBI and Justice Department are weaponized”, that “President Biden is crooked” and Special Counsel Smith is “deranged”. He even claimed that Judge Chutkan was a Trump hater, and insists that she recuse herself.
“They Leak, Lie & Sue, and they won’t allow me to SPEAK”, Trump wrote on his social media. Special Counsel “Smith wants to take away my rights to speak freely and openly under the First Amendment”. His lawyers should advise him that specific threats, especially those with an intent of causing bodily harm and endangering lives, are not protected by the First Amendment.
Trump’s desperate defense strategy is obvious. Left without any restraints, he will order his thugs (the process has already begun) to send death threats to witnesses, prosecutors and their families. He will poison the jury pools, so that a unanimous verdict may not be possible. The judge may have to call a mistrial, which he will trumpet to his base as proof of his innocence, a triumph.
Judge Chutkan, the presiding judge over the case against Trump on the alleged felony of sedition in the January 6 insurrection, had imposed certain conditions on Trump on his release on bail. Trump has already flouted these conditions.
Special Counsel Smith has now filed a request for a “narrowly tailored gag order” on Trump, limiting how he would be able to publicly comment on any of the cases against him. However, knowing Trump and the certainty that he will violate such a gag order, Judge Chutkan may well have to reconsider more Draconian measures to restrain Trump from interfering in the judicial process in the future, up to and including imprisonment.
Features
A wage for housework? India’s sweeping experiment in paying women
In a village in the central Indian state of Madhya Pradesh, a woman receives a small but steady sum each month – not wages, for she has no formal job, but an unconditional cash transfer from the government.
Premila Bhalavi says the money covers medicines, vegetables and her son’s school fees. The sum, 1,500 rupees ($16: £12), may be small, but its effect – predictable income, a sense of control and a taste of independence – is anything but.
Her story is increasingly common. Across India, 118 million adult women in 12 states now receive unconditional cash transfers from their governments, making India the site of one of the world’s largest and least-studied social-policy experiments.
Long accustomed to subsidising grain, fuel and rural jobs, India has stumbled into something more radical: paying adult women simply because they keep households running, bear the burden of unpaid care and form an electorate too large to ignore.
Eligibility filters vary – age thresholds, income caps and exclusions for families with government employees, taxpayers or owners of cars or large plots of land.
“The unconditional cash transfers signal a significant expansion of Indian states’ welfare regimes in favour of women,” Prabha Kotiswaran, a professor of law and social justice at King’s College London, told the BBC.
The transfers range from 1,000-2,500 rupees ($12-$30) a month – meagre sums, worth roughly 5-12% of household income, but regular. With 300 million women now holding bank accounts, transfers have become administratively simple.
Women typically spend the money on household and family needs – children’s education, groceries, cooking gas, medical and emergency expenses, retiring small debts and occasional personal items like gold or small comforts.
What sets India apart from Mexico, Brazil or Indonesia – countries with large conditional cash-transfer schemes – is the absence of conditions: the money arrives whether or not a child attends school or a household falls below the poverty line.

Goa was the first state to launch an unconditional cash transfer scheme to women in 2013. The phenomenon picked up just before the pandemic in 2020, when north-eastern Assam rolled out a scheme for vulnerable women. Since then these transfers have turned into a political juggernaut.
The recent wave of unconditional cash transfers targets adult women, with some states acknowledging their unpaid domestic and care work. Tamil Nadu frames its payments as a “rights grant” while West Bengal’s scheme similarly recognises women’s unpaid contributions.
In other states, the recognition is implicit: policymakers expect women to use the transfers for household and family welfare, say experts.
This focus on women’s economic role has also shaped politics: in 2021, Tamil actor-turned-politician Kamal Haasan promised “salaries for housewives”. (His fledgling party lost.) By 2024, pledges of women-focused cash transfers helped deliver victories to political parties in Maharashtra, Jharkhand, Odisha, Haryana and Andhra Pradesh.
In the recent elections in Bihar, the political power of cash transfers was on stark display. In the weeks before polling in the country’s poorest state, the government transferred 10,000 rupees ($112; £85) to 7.5 million female bank accounts under a livelihood-generation scheme. Women voted in larger numbers than men, decisively shaping the outcome.
Critics called it blatant vote-buying, but the result was clear: women helped the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led coalition secure a landslide victory. Many believe this cash infusion was a reminder of how financial support can be used as political leverage.
Yet Bihar is only one piece of a much larger picture. Across India, unconditional cash transfers are reaching tens of millions of women on a regular basis.
Maharashtra alone promises benefits for 25 million women; Odisha’s scheme reaches 71% of its female voters.
In some policy circles, the schemes are derided as vote-buying freebies. They also put pressure on state finances: 12 states are set to spend around $18bn on such payouts this fiscal year. A report by think-tank PRS Legislative Research notes that half of these states face revenue deficits – this happens when a state borrows to pay regular expenses without creating assets.
But many argue they also reflect a slow recognition of something India’s feminists have argued for decades: the economic value of unpaid domestic and care work.
Women in India spent nearly five hours a day on such work in 2024 – more than three times the time spent by men, according to the latest Time Use Survey. This lopsided burden helps explain India’s stubbornly low female labour-force participation. The cash transfers, at least, acknowledge the imbalance, experts say.
Do they work?
Evidence is still thin but instructive. A 2025 study in Maharashtra found that 30% of eligible women did not register – sometimes because of documentation problems, sometimes out of a sense of self-sufficiency. But among those who did, nearly all controlled their own bank accounts.

A 2023 survey in West Bengal found that 90% operated their accounts themselves and 86% decided how to spend the money. Most used it for food, education and medical costs; hardly transformative, but the regularity offered security and a sense of agency.
More detailed work by Prof Kotiswaran and colleagues shows mixed outcomes.
In Assam, most women spent the money on essentials; many appreciated the dignity it afforded, but few linked it to recognition of unpaid work, and most would still prefer paid jobs.
In Tamil Nadu, women getting the money spoke of peace of mind, reduced marital conflict and newfound confidence – a rare social dividend. In Karnataka, beneficiaries reported eating better, gaining more say in household decisions and wanting higher payments.
Yet only a sliver understood the scheme as compensation for unpaid care work; messaging had not travelled. Even so, women said the money allowed them to question politicians and manage emergencies. Across studies, the majority of women had full control of the cash.
“The evidence shows that the cash transfers are tremendously useful for women to meet their own immediate needs and those of their households. They also restore dignity to women who are otherwise financially dependent on their husbands for every minor expense,” Prof Kotiswaran says.
Importantly, none of the surveys finds evidence that the money discourages women from seeking paid work or entrench gender roles – the two big feminist fears, according to a report by Prof Kotiswaran along with Gale Andrew and Madhusree Jana.
Nor have they reduced women’s unpaid workload, the researchers find. They do, however, strengthen financial autonomy and modestly strengthen bargaining power. They are neither panacea nor poison: they are useful but limited tools, operating in a patriarchal society where cash alone cannot undo structural inequities.

What next?
The emerging research offers clear hints.
Eligibility rules should be simplified, especially for women doing heavy unpaid care work. Transfers should remain unconditional and independent of marital status.
But messaging should emphasise women’s rights and the value of unpaid work, and financial-literacy efforts must deepen, researchers say. And cash transfers cannot substitute for employment opportunities; many women say what they really want is work that pays and respect that endures.
“If the transfers are coupled with messaging on the recognition of women’s unpaid work, they could potentially disrupt the gendered division of labour when paid employment opportunities become available,” says Prof Kotiswaran.
India’s quiet cash transfers revolution is still in its early chapters. But it already shows that small, regular sums – paid directly to women – can shift power in subtle, significant ways.
Whether this becomes a path to empowerment or merely a new form of political patronage will depend on what India chooses to build around the money.
[BBC]
Features
People set example for politicians to follow
Some opposition political parties have striven hard to turn the disaster of Cyclone Ditwah to their advantage. A calamity of such unanticipated proportions ought to have enabled all political parties to come together to deal with this tragedy. Failure to do so would indicate both political and moral bankruptcy. The main issue they have forcefully brought up is the government’s failure to take early action on the Meteorological Department’s warnings. The Opposition even convened a meeting of their own with former President Ranil Wickremesinghe and other senior politicians who shared their experience of dealing with natural and man-made disasters of the past, and the present government’s failures to match them.
The difficulty to anticipate the havoc caused by the cyclone was compounded by the neglect of the disaster management system, which includes previous governments that failed to utilise the allocated funds in an open, transparent and corruption free manner. Land designated as “Red Zones” by the National Building Research Organisation (NBRO), a government research and development institute, were built upon by people and ignored by successive governments, civil society and the media alike. NBRO was established in 1984. According to NBRO records, the decision to launch a formal “Landslide Hazard Zonation Mapping Project (LHMP)” dates from 1986. The institutional process of identifying landslide-prone slopes, classifying zones (including what we today call “Red Zones”), and producing hazard maps, started roughly 35 to 40 years ago.
Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines which were lashed by cyclones at around the same time as Sri Lanka experienced Cyclone Ditwah were also unprepared and also suffered enormously. The devastation caused by cyclones in the larger southeast Asian region is due to global climate change. During Cyclone Ditwah some parts of the central highlands received more than 500 mm of rainfall. Official climatological data cite the average annual rainfall for Sri Lanka as roughly 1850 mm though this varies widely by region: from around 900 mm in the dry zones up to 5,000 mm in wet zones. The torrential rains triggered by Ditwah were so heavy that for some communities they represented a rainfall surge comparable to a major part of their typical annual rainfall.
Inclusive Approach
Climate change now joins the pantheon of Sri Lanka’s challenges that are beyond the ability of a single political party or government to resolve. It is like the economic bankruptcy, ethnic conflict and corruption in governance that requires an inclusive approach in which the Opposition, civil society, religious society and the business community need to join rather than merely criticise the government. It will be in their self-interest to do so. A younger generation (Gen Z), with more energy and familiarity with digital technologies filled, the gaps that the government was unable to fill and, in a sense, made both the Opposition and traditional civil society redundant.
Within hours of news coming in that floods and landslides were causing havoc to hundreds of thousands of people, a people’s movement for relief measures was underway. There was no one organiser or leader. There were hundreds who catalysed volunteers to mobilise to collect resources and to cook meals for the victims in community kitchens they set up. These community kitchens sprang up in schools, temples, mosques, garages and even roadside stalls. Volunteers used social media to crowdsource supplies, match donors with delivery vehicles, and coordinate routes that had become impassable due to fallen trees or mudslides. It was a level of commitment and coordination rarely achieved by formal institutions.
The spontaneous outpouring of support was not only a youth phenomenon. The larger population, too, contributed to the relief effort. The Galle District Secretariat sent 23 tons of rice to the cyclone affected areas from donations brought by the people. The Matara District Secretariat made arrangements to send teams of volunteers to the worst affected areas. Just as in the Aragalaya protest movement of 2022, those who joined the relief effort were from all ethnic and religious communities. They gave their assistance to anyone in need, regardless of community. This showed that in times of crisis, Sri Lankans treat others without discrimination as human beings, not as members of specific communities.
Turning Point
The challenge to the government will be to ensure that the unity among the people that the cyclone disaster has brought will outlive the immediate relief phase and continue into the longer term task of national reconstruction. There will be a need to rethink the course of economic development to ensure human security. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has spoken about the need to resettle all people who live above 5000 feet and to reforest those areas. This will require finding land for resettlement elsewhere. The resettlement of people in the hill country will require that the government address the issue of land rights for the Malaiyaha Tamils.
Since independence the Malaiyaha Tamils have been collectively denied ownership to land due first to citizenship issues and now due to poverty and unwillingness of plantation managements to deal with these issues in a just and humanitarian manner beneficial to the workers. Their resettlement raises complex social, economic and political questions. It demands careful planning to avoid repeating past mistakes where displaced communities were moved to areas lacking water, infrastructure or livelihoods. It also requires political consensus, as land is one of the most contentious issues in Sri Lanka, tied closely to identity, ethnicity and historical grievances. Any sustainable solution must go beyond temporary relocation and confront the historical exclusion of the Malaiyaha Tamil community, whose labour sustains the plantation economy but who remain among the poorest groups in the country.
Cyclone Ditwah has thus become a turning point. It has highlighted the need to strengthen governance and disaster preparedness, but it has also revealed a different possibility for Sri Lanka, one in which the people lead with humanity and aspire for the wellbeing of all, and the political leadership emulates their example. The people have shown through their collective response to Cyclone Ditwah that unity and compassion remain strong, which a sincere, moral and hardworking government can tap into. The challenge to the government will be to ensure that the unity among the people that the cyclone disaster has brought will outlive the immediate relief phase and continue into the longer term task of national reconstruction with political reconciliation.
by Jehan Perera
Features
An awakening: Revisiting education policy after Cyclone Ditwah
In the short span of two or three days, Cyclone Ditwah, has caused a disaster of unprecedented proportions in our midst. Lashing away at almost the entirety of the country, it has broken through the ramparts of centuries old structures and eroded into areas, once considered safe and secure.
The rains may have passed us by. The waters will recede, shops will reopen, water will be in our taps, and we can resume the daily grind of life. But it will not be the same anymore; it should not be. It should not be business as usual for any of us, nor for the government. Within the past few years, Sri Lankan communities have found themselves in the middle of a crisis after crisis, both natural and man-made, but always made acute by the myopic policies of successive governments, and fuelled by the deeply hierarchical, gendered and ethnicised divides that exist within our societies. The need of the hour for the government today is to reassess its policies and rethink the directions the country, as a whole, has been pushed into.
Neoliberal disaster
In the aftermath of the devastation caused by the natural disaster, fundamental questions have been raised about our existence. Our disaster is, in whole or in part, the result of a badly and cruelly managed environment of the planet. Questions have been raised about the nature of our economy. We need to rethink the way land is used. Livelihoods may have to be built anew, promoting people’s welfare, and by deveoloping a policy on climate change. Mega construction projects is a major culprit as commentators have noted. Landslides in the upcountry are not merely a result of Ditwah lashing at our shores and hills, but are far more structural and points to centuries of mismanagement of land. (https://island.lk/weather-disasters-sri-lanka-flooded-by-policy-blunders-weak-enforcement-and-environmental-crime-climate-expert/). It is also about the way people have been shunted into lands, voluntarily or involuntarily, that are precarious, in their pursuit of a viable livelihood, within the limited opportunities available to them.
Neo liberal policies that demand unfettered land appropriation and built on the premise of economic growth at any expense, leading to growing rural-urban divides, need to be scrutinised for their short and long term consequences. And it is not that any of these economic drives have brought any measure of relief and rejuvenation of the economy. We have been under the tyrannical hold of the IMF, camouflaged as aid and recovery, but sinking us deeper into the debt trap. In October 2025, Ahilan Kadirgamar writes, that the IMF programme by the end of 2027, “will set up Sri Lanka for the next crisis.” He also lambasts the Central Bank and the government’s fiscal policy for their punishing interest rates in the context of disinflation and rising poverty levels. We have had to devalue the rupee last month, and continue to rely on the workforce of domestic workers in West Asia as the major source of foreign exchange. The government’s negotiations with the IMF have focused largely on relief and infrastructure rebuilding, despite calls from civil society, demanding debt justice.
The government has unabashedly repledged its support for the big business class. The cruelest cut of them all is the appointment of a set of high level corporate personalities to the post-disaster recovery committee, with the grand name, “Rebuilding Sri Lanka.” The message is loud and clear, and is clearly a slap in the face of the working people of the country, whose needs run counter to the excessive greed of extractive corporate freeloaders. Economic growth has to be understood in terms that are radically different from what we have been forced to think of it as, till now. For instance, instead of investment for high profits, and the business of buy and sell in the market, rechannel investment and labour into overall welfare. Even catch phrases like sustainable development have missed their mark. We need to think of the economy more holistically and see it as the sustainability of life, livelihood and the wellbeing of the planet.
The disaster has brought on an urgency for rethinking our policies. One of the areas where this is critical is education. There are two fundamental challenges facing education: Budget allocation and priorities. In an address at a gathering of the Chamber of Commerce, on 02 December, speaking on rebuilding efforts, the Prime Minister and Minister of Education Dr. Harini Amarasuriya restated her commitment to the budget that has been passed, a budget that has a meagre 2.4% of the GDP allocated for education. This allocation for education comes in a year that educational reforms are being rolled out, when heavy expenses will likely be incurred. In the aftermath of the disaster, this has become more urgent than ever.
Reforms in Education
The Government has announced a set of amendments to educational policy and implementation, with little warning and almost no consultation with the public, found in the document, Transforming General Education in Sri Lanka 2025 published by the Ministry of Education. Though hailed as transformative by the Prime Minister (https://www.news.lk/current-affairs/in-the-prevailing-situation-it-is-necessary-to-act-strategically-while-creating-the-proper-investments-ensuring-that-actions-are-discharged-on-proper-policies-pm), the policy is no more than a regurgitation of what is already there, made worse. There are a few welcome moves, like the importance placed on vocational training. Here, I want to raise three points relating to vital areas of the curriculum that are of concern: 1) streamlining at an early age; relatedly 2) prioritising and privileging what is seen as STEM education; and 3) introducing a credit-based modular education.
1. A study of the policy document will demonstrate very clearly that streamlining begins with Junior Secondary Education via a career interest test, that encourages students to pursue a particular stream in higher studies. Further Learning Modules at both “Junior Secondary Education” and “Senior Secondary Education Phase I,” entrench this tendency. Psychometric testing, that furthers this goal, as already written about in our column (https://kuppicollective.lk/psychometrics-and-the-curriculum-for-general-education/) points to the bizarre.
2. The kernel of the curriculum of the qualifying examination of Senior Secondary Education Phase I, has five mandatory subjects, including First Language, Math, and Science. There is no mandatory social science or humanities related subject. One can choose two subjects from a set of electives that has history and geography as separate subjects, but a Humanities/Social Science subject is not in the list of mandatory subjects. .
3. A credit-based, modular education: Even in universities, at the level of an advanced study of a discipline, many of us are struggling with module-based education. The credit system promotes a fragmented learning process, where, depth is sacrificed for quick learning, evaluated numerically, in credit values.
Units of learning, assessed, piece meal, are emphasised over fundamentals and the detailing of fundamentals. Introducing a module based curriculum in secondary education can have an adverse impact on developing the capacity of a student to learn a subject in a sustained manner at deeper levels.
Education wise, and pedagogically, we need to be concerned about rigidly compartmentalising science oriented, including technological subjects, separately from Humanities and Social Studies. This cleavage is what has led to the idea of calling science related subjects, STEM, automatically devaluing humanities and social sciences. Ironically, universities, today, have attempted, in some instances, to mix both streams in their curriculums, but with little success; for the overall paradigm of education has been less about educational goals and pedagogical imperatives, than about technocratic priorities, namely, compartmentalisation, fragmentation, and piecemeal consumerism. A holistic response to development needs to rethink such priorities, categorisations and specialisations. A social and sociological approach has to be built into all our educational and development programmes.
National Disasters and Rebuilding Community
In the aftermath of the disaster, the role of education has to be rethought radically. We need a curriculum that is not trapped in the dichotomy of STEM and Humanities, and be overly streamlined and fragmented. The introduction of climate change as a discipline, or attention to environmental destruction cannot be a STEM subject, a Social Science/Humanities subject or even a blend of the two. It is about the vision of an economic-cum-educational policy that sees the environment and the economy as a function of the welfare of the people. Educational reforms must be built on those fundamentals and not on real or imagined short term goals, promoted at the economic end by neo liberal policies and the profiteering capitalist class.
As I write this, the sky brightens with its first streaks of light, after days of incessant rain and gloom, bringing hope into our hearts, and some cheer into the hearts of those hundreds of thousands of massively affected people, anxiously waiting for a change in the weather every second of their lives. The sense of hope that allows us to forge ahead is collective and social. The response by Lankan communities, to the disaster, has been tremendously heartwarming, infusing hope into what still is a situation without hope for many. This spirit of collective endeavour holds the promise for what should be the foundation for recovery. People’s demands and needs should shape the re-envisioning of policy, particularly in the vital areas of education and economy.
(Sivamohan Sumathy was formerly attached to the Department of English, University of Peradeniya)
Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.
By Sivamohan Sumathy
-
News7 days ago
Lunuwila tragedy not caused by those videoing Bell 212: SLAF
-
News2 days agoOver 35,000 drug offenders nabbed in 36 days
-
News5 days agoLevel III landslide early warning continue to be in force in the districts of Kandy, Kegalle, Kurunegala and Matale
-
Business4 days agoLOLC Finance Factoring powers business growth
-
News4 days agoCPC delegation meets JVP for talks on disaster response
-
News4 days agoA 6th Year Accolade: The Eternal Opulence of My Fair Lady
-
News2 days agoRising water level in Malwathu Oya triggers alert in Thanthirimale
-
Midweek Review7 days agoHouse erupts over Met Chief’s 12 Nov unheeded warning about cyclone Ditwah
