Seminar on Civic Education for the Youth

Organised by Nepal Foundation For Advanced Studies (NEFAS)

Hetauda, 20 June 2006

Participation was active and very fruitful for NEFAS, especially given that its objective was to gather comments from different sections of the society, particularly teachers, on the civic education book that it is in the process of updating. Unlike similar seminars conducted in other parts of the country, the Hetauda even proved to be more focused on the issue of civic education itself. It is not that participants refrained from discussing the burning political issues of the day, as most seminars are wont to veer towards, but the overwhelming response was on the quality of the paper, the issues that it raised and those that it still needed to. The discussions were chaired by Bijaya Kumar Sharma, himself a teacher of the subject.

Prior to the discussions, Ananda Srestha, executive director of NEFAS, welcomed the participants saying: Since 1990, Nepal Foundation for Advanced Studies has been working as an academic non-profit organization. We have been involved in organizing discussions and carrying out research on development issues and democracy and then publishing the outcomes. It was in this context that we initiated discussions on civic education. This has taken us to different parts of the country and we have been receiving feedback on the book we published on the subject. The book is now part of the school curriculum. Please make comments on the paper being presented so that we can include your experiences in the next edition of the book.

After the welcome remarks, Prof. Ram Kumar Dahal made his presentation saying, "Civic education turns people into citizens in all parts of the world. We find that there are countries that have a perpetual system of educating the citizens with different kind of education for different age groups. In the context of globalization, the need for such education is felt even more. We do not see any such education effort in Nepal. Even in the education sector we see that only several subjects like law or political science are somewhat aware about the civic education issues. Other subjects have not seen the need to include the issues in their curriculum. Some time ago, we had the Nepal Parichaya to cover all the students, but not any more."
Prof Dahal went on: There is a difference between moral education and civic education. NEFAS has been discussing these issues and coming out with publications by going to different parts of the country.
In the changing context of democracy in Nepal, the need for civic education is being felt even more. We have new issues like the constituent assembly coming up that we need to understand.
The debate on the constituent assembly is confusing for many. People are talking about different models of the assembly and we do not know which one we should be adopting. The main issue is that our context is unique and that none of the available models can suit us. There is a need to contextualize it to suit our needs as the problem of representation is quite challenging in a diverse country like ours. We have a lot of complaints regarding inclusion and participation from different groups of people. We must be able to address the grievances while devising a model.
Discussions on state restructuring have aroused similar confusion. People are talking about federalism, or secularism. Even federalism requires thinking about whether it should be regional federalism or ethnic federalism. Even regional federalism can be done along ecological zones or dictated by the need for national integrity.
Similar confusion regarding whether we need to change the first-part-the-post electoral system into a more proportional representative one. These are challenging issues for the existing political parties. There is a lot of sacrifice needed on the part of the existing political forces rather than accruing gains from them. This means that these are challenging issues.
There is a difference between education given by parties to their workers and civic education. The education by the parties is based on the philosophy that their own party is supreme but civic education puts that in a more proper light.

After the professor's presentation, a paper was read out by Shivaraj Dahal to attract comments to be included in the civic education book. His paper deals with issues affected by the absence of civic education in Nepal. The lack of a proper political culture among politicians, an utter absence of civic sense among the youths, brain drain, muscle drain and the general lack of a sense of duty towards the nation, the society and the people at large. His thesis is that to reverse these negative trends, one must inject a sense of responsibility, along with the corresponding rights, in them through civic education.

Dahal's presentation was followed by the floor discussions which saw debates regarding whether the paper should have included the just concluded popular movement or not, ways to become inclusive while devising the political structure, and the need to end all social discrimination.
Apart from politics, participants took up most of their time suggesting ways to update the paper with ideas like including more social issues rather than focussing on politics or democracy only. Some wanted more theoretical treatment provided to the issues raised while others centered on debates regarding whether history should or should not include role models who helped unification of the nation.
One of the issues that frequently comes up during these seminars is the focus on particular age groups as a target group for civic education. Like in many other seminars, here too participants wanted a more comprehensive plan to educate students at different school and college levels rather than making it a subject of only one or two classes. Some wanted to discuss problems in the education sector as a whole rather than just civics.

After Prof. Ram Kumar Dahal and Shivaraj Dahal furnished their replies to the queries raised by the floor, the Chairperson's remarks was given by Bijaya Kumar Sharma thus:
Civic education is not a new subject. We had a system when the worst students were forced to take civics. This is the kind of priorities we gave the subject in the past. Later, it was used to prop up the political system. Later still, some curricula were allowed to keep civics while others were not. Nepal Parichaya was then introduced with the elements of civics. Even students were discriminated against if they took civics as an option.
There is a difference between citizens and people. Citizens can explain the details surrounding their own environment, while every person cannot do so.
An ordinary person, exploited at home, will be exploited even when he goes abroad. But a citizen realizes his rights wherever he goes.
Before identifying oneself as a Hindu, or Dalit or whatever, one should know that he is a citizen.
We talk of many problems, but what is the basis of all these problems? Inclusiveness is the main theme in all these problems. Therefore, the three models of the constituent assembly will not resolve our problems. Rather a fourth one that needs to be developed for Nepal.
Research has shown that in 25 years we can carry out social restructuring. Obu city was formed in 22 months with 700,000 population. Hetauda has barely 50,000.