Paharis’ Schooling: A Postmodern Lens

Abstract

The heterogeneity of language and socio-cultural setting of schools made me interested to know about Pahari’s schooling. In this process I tried to know the worldview of the Paharis. How their worldview is difference and differance from the worldview of the non-Paharis? How the Paharis' and non-Paharis' construct of schooling? How are the matched/unmatched with each other? What can be alternative measures to help Pahari children for their better learning? In order to understand the subjectivity of these stakeholders of education, I selected Pahari community; Pahari children dominated school, Pahari and non-Pahari teachers, Pahari parents and Pahari organization of the peri urban area called Bodikhel of Lalitpur district for fieldwork. There I tried to understand the Pahari community in general and school aged - Pahari children in particular. In doing so, I examined the Pahari community from Kaupapa theory. But in understanding the schooling of Pahari, I applied Derridian standpoint. For this, I used qualitative research design. The methodology to gather field information I analyzed documents, interviewed people, observed the community and school practice, conducted focus group discussion, and did case studies. For data management, I analyzed stakeholders’ perceptions and did theoretical interpretations of these perspectives.

This study found that (a) due to the lacking of social cosmos formal schooling has been the place of interface between self and other to the Pahari schoolchildren (b) Pahari found the utility of mainstream language at one time and in other times they found linguistic oppression. In both situations they just looked for their identity (c) by lingual/socio-cultural setting of schools can also create co-existence through binary opposites relationship between the opposite groups (d) Pahari students’ looking self-glass has search for symbolic representation at the time of learning and teaching process and teachers were failed to do so (e) for Pahari schoolchildren, school is a condition of “no hearing” and (f) Pahari schoolchildren interpreted the school from different angles. School in this regard lacked the knowledge and environment for the creation of hybridized culture for educational justice to the Pahari children.

Out of the above findings, I have drawn some implications as well. These implications include Pahari students are facing difficulty in school and at the same time they are creating the alternative ways for getting the educational justice to all. In this situation, formal schooling can be redesigned to make social cosmos with school's cosmos. This effort can bridge the gap between Paharis’ home schooling and formal schooling for the improvement of their personality. Teachers' reorientation can make it happen. The second implication is that school should value socio-culturally different students' subjectivity and promote co-learning including language co-existence approach in school. The third implication is that teachers should learn students' home culture and traditionally handed down teaching learning practices. Once they learn it they are supposed to ensure the linkages between the school and students' approach to learning and teaching.