Facilitating whistle blowing in science: Why we need a culture of “science audits” in all facets of scientific endeavour

 

"It's not unpatriotic to denounce an injustice committed on our behalf, perhaps it's the most patriotic thing we can do." — E.A. Bucchianeri

In previous years we had published several papers on journal ranking and classification, pre-publication reviews, and post-publication reviews, all in the interests of better and high-quality science. In this article, we propose that a formal whistle-blowing mechanism must be incorporated in science, and preferably institutionalized.  This must be viewed in the context of the rising threat of pseudo-science, and the deteriorating quality of science both in the developing and western world.  These people must act as watch dogs and conscience keepers for scientific activity, just as there are other conscience keepers for witches for other religions and ideologies. We would actually recommend that a dedicated group of researchers commit themselves to the cause, in addition to their discharge of other scientific duties, roles and responsibilities. This may of course be subject to time, cost, and other practical constraints.  We begin this paper by providing not only definitions, but also characteristics and attributes of bona fide science and pseudoscience along with some suitable examples culled from diverse fields and contexts. We also discuss and debate good science, bad science and proto science briefly with additional pertinent examples. We will also then proceed to show that while miracle busters, myth busters and superstition busters are prevalent and widespread in many parts of the world, whistle blowing in the context of bad or pseudo science is still a nascent and underdeveloped field, which needs development and reinforcement. We also say this because it is highly lamentable that dubious science sometimes gets mainstreamed without an appropriate gate keeping process to the detriment of science, and eventually societies and education systems around the world. We quote a couple of other scientists and researchers to bolster our case, and conclude that this activity and endeavour is pretty much essential to foster and nurture ideology-free and high-quality science as well, and foster greater ethics and transparency throughout the knowledge production lifecycle. This paper therefore, forms an essential aspect and component of our ongoing globalization movement, particularly for various fields and subfields of the social sciences.    

Science and pseudoscience

Science is represented by a systematic and an honest process of knowledge creation, and the term also often refers to a systematic and consistent body of knowledge gained regarding various observable phenomena. Science primarily makes use of facts, evidence, and rigorous testing to understand the means by which natural, physical, and in some cases, the social worlds function and operate. Pseudoscience on the other hand, chiefly consists of statements, beliefs, or practices that claim to be scientific an bona fide but are in fact incompatible and inconsistent with the scientific method and the rigorous processes associated with scientific discovery. Pseudoscience often makes pompous and dubious claims which are also unfalsifiable, thereby negating the fundamentals of good and acceptable sciences. Such claims also do not rely or rest on genuine and incontestable data and rigourous testing processes but instead rely heavily on hearsay and anecdotal evidence. Pseudoscientific claims are often never peer-reviewed, and are innately and inherently non self-correcting. Pseudoscientific claims chase popularity among a scientifically naïve and non-erudite audience, with the sole objective of climbing the popularity charts.  They are also designed to provide pecuniary benefits to the proponent, and rely heavily on sensationalism. As they say “A lie travels half way around the world when the truth is still putting on its shoes. The term "pseudoscience" evolved over time. However, the earliest attested usage of the term dates back to 1796 when it meant a "pretended or mistaken science". James Pettit Andrews, an English historian and antiquarian, used the term in the first volume of his historical work, “History of Great Britain, from the Death of Henry VIII to the Accession of James VI of Scotland”, which was published in 1796, and his intention was primarily to critique alchemy. Francois Magendie, an eminent French psychologist further used the term in 1843, when he directly critiqued phrenology which has now been totally discredited, and is considered to a pseudoscience beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt. Karl Popper also popularized the term “pseudoscience” in a modern context and setting and introduced the all-important concept of falsifiability. According to him, a true science must be falsifiable, and must therefore, always be open to criticism.

In addition, astrology, palmistry, and numerology are widely discredited, and the jury is still out whether the basics of homeopathy can be construed as valid. Cryptozoology, which is the search for creatures from mythical folklore, such as Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster, is also considered to be dubious science. We also then have the concept of protoscience, and this term is used to describe a field of inquiry that has not yet gained mainstream scientific acceptance. For example, alchemy later morphed into chemistry in a way, but alchemy is in many ways only a proto science.  Over a period of time, new and novel claims do get mainstreamed however, and some prime examples include Alfred Wegener’s continental drift theory, and the germ theory which was pioneered by Girolamo Fracastoro, Ignaz Semmelweis, and Joseph Liste, but was proven by Louis Pasteur. Other claims made in fields such as phrenology, reflexology, Lysenkoism, and iridology have remained within the realm of pseudoscience, however. We must also distinguish between good science an bad science, as the latter is not entirely bona fide, and often leads to distorted results. The latter often relies heavily on confirmation bias, cherry picks data, resorts to deliberate and intentional obfuscation of inconvenient data, etc. some dubious sciences such as Eugenics – pioneered by Sir Francis Galton and others have been outright dangerous to humanity as they have directly and indirectly promoted racism, and trampled upon human rights. Other theories such as Atlantis (found in Plato’s writings) have been totally discredited, and the theory of Lemuria which emerged as a bona fide science, is now discredited as well.

Other examples of bogus science have included “The chariots of the Gods” advanced in 1968 by Swiss author Erich von Daniken. This book popularized the claim that extraterrestrial beings visited earth in early antiquity and were worshiped by earthlings. The Orion constellation theory championed by Robert Bauval since 1989, also has many logical consistencies, and is highly suspect at best. Evidence to prove that Jesus lived in India either during his lost years or after his crucifixion are flimsy at best, and such theories have been criticized by Max Muller and others, though they were initially promoted by Nicolas Notovitch and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, and later by Holger Kersten. Other contemporary pseudoscience writers have included Graham Hancock known for his fantastic claims in the realm of pseudo archaeology, Zecharia Sitchin, another pseudo archaeology writer, and the John C. Whitcomb and Henry M. Morris duo whose work led to the “Young earth creationism” movement. The intelligent design movement was launched by Phillip E. Johnson, Michael Behe and others, but their claims do not comply with methodological naturalism.  The New Age Movement took off in the 1970’s and 1980’s, though some of its core claims are considered to be pseudoscientific. More recent movements such as postmodernism, and post-processual archaeology have also emphasized subjectivity and subjective interpretation over objectivity, and such schools of thought may compromise severely with objectivity.

In some cases, there have been cases of outright scientific fraud as exemplified by the Piltdown man hoax and the Schon scandal. More recently Jason Arday of Cambridge University committed suicide, after alleged plagiarism and malfeasance accusations came to light. Hindutva writers have often championed pseudoscience too, and so have some Dravidian nationalist writers. Both camps have made often outrageous and untenable claims that were rejected by the scientific community.  There are ideologies in science too, and the concept was described in detail by Georges Canguilhem and others. This often leads to echo chambers and intellectual cabals. Science also progresses somewhat slowly due to careerism, and resistance to new ideas, and this is often known as the Planck’s principle. This is particularly true when paradigm shifts are involved. While some amount of careerism, personal, cultural and subjective ideological bias is inevitable, we must learn to draw the line somewhere. Society must not suffer due to careerism, and neither must the long-term and healthy progress of science. We must gradually attempt to move towards a post-ideology world in science, mo matter how long it takes. We have had pseudo science busters too and examples have included Martin Gardner, Ben Goldacre, James Randi, and others. The latter mostly functioned as a miracle buster. In India, Basava Premanand, Abraham Kovvur, H Narasimhaiah and others have done good work too. The rationalist movement has been strong in India, and pioneers have included Muddu Narasimham Naidu, Saraswati Gora, Innaiah Narisetti, Babu Gogineni, and others.  

However, we believe that scientific method and the philosophy of science themselves need a radical overhaul – we have dedicated and committed over thirty papers to scientific method and the philosophy of science. Objectivity and society focused science must be baked into scientific method as far as possible, and science communication must be stepped up to. Scientific method must be taught to students right from a young age, along with epistemology and the philosophy of science, and science must not be reduced to a mere rote memorization of facts, but must be viewed as a process by means of which new conclusions are reached . Students must be taught how to think, and not only what to think.  At present, we are still very weak in this department, and students cannot even distinguish between strong evidence and weak evidence. People must be taught to expose conspiracy theories which are often based on, or linked to persecution complexes. Scientific method itself we believe must improve, and future researchers must set the direction in this context. All these are so necessary, to promote a scientific temper, a concept that was famously proposed by the late Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. We also believe we need cross cultural approaches and region and context specific approaches to understanding how people think and building a scientific temper. We must try to understand why people believe what they do. That is why we need emic perspectives driven by cross-cultural research design, and  other valid and bonafide social science research techniques. We also need to adopt cultural frames of reference and cross-cultural frames of reference. We had written about all these concepts extensively in the past. We believe that the pseudoscience problem must be approached from a sociological and structural angle, shifting the focus from simply mocking fringe beliefs to examining why mainstream science fails to prevent them.

We have also always argued that pseudoscience flourishes primarily because mainstream science has often left massive gaps due to non interdisciplinary approaches and over-the-top approaches, has often suffered from ideological bias, and has failed to maintain public trust in the process. This observation, we believe holds good particularly for the developing world, though it is not necessarily limited to it In a 2025 paper entitled “Reigniting public trust and public confidence in science: Why high quality science alone will restore trust in science and wipe out pseudoscience”, we had even advanced a core premise, namely: “One kind of bias legitimizes every other kind of bias”. This essentially asserts that if mainstream scholarship becomes ideological, rigid, or epistemologically incomplete, it triggers a dangerous public counter-reaction. When the man in the street observes and realizes that mainstream academic frameworks are flawed, biased, or Eurocentric, (as they more often are for the social sciences) he begins to lose faith in established scientific institutions, and in scientific scholarship in general. This loss of institutional trust creates an intellectual vacuum, which fringe groups with vested interests eagerly and enthusiastically exploit, driving a dangerous resurrection of pseudoscientific movements of different kinds. [1]

We will therefore consistently maintain the idea that the only successful and long lasting way to wipe out pseudoscience is not through censorship, but by producing mainstream science that is of a fundamentally higher quality. Also, when mainstream research models, frameworks or paradigms, dogmatically adhere on unproven myths, they more or less mirror the pseudosciences they claim or seek to oppose. In other words, ideology is the gateway to pseudoscience. In other words, when scientists design and conduct experiments in order to mainstream a preconceived ideological narrative rather than discover the absolute truth, they are no longer practicing real or fully objective or socially responsible science. We therefore fiercely champion and promote “Ideology-Free Science", arguing that researchers must remain strictly objective, make use of precise and objective measurements, and rely on data driven conclusions. Of course, we need rigorous scholarship, but rigorous does not necessarily equate to objective if it is one sided. Scholarship therefore needs to be both rigorous and objective. [2] [3]

We have also argued for the need to overhaul educational systems because current education systems are woefully inadequate in fostering critical thinking, and inculcating a scientific temper. In order to construct a strong and fortified defense against pseudoscience, we have advocates for educational reforms, and have dedicated several papers to this cause. The ability to distinguish good and bona fide science from pseudoscience must be taught to children at the appropriate academic level, so that pseudoscientific constructs are eventually edged out. If scientists practice intellectual elitism and talk down to everyday people or insult their traditional cultures of points of view rashly or inappropriately, they will alienate the general public and greatly delay the process of social change. Instead, science must not only  of fundamentally and intrinsically high quality, but must also be globalized (especially for the social sciences) and cross-cultural enough to win public trust, and public hearts and minds. Mainstream, trained scientists must hold objectivity and commitment to the truth closer to their heart than untrained people. This is because mainstream scientists claim to be the custodians of truth and knowledge. In this context and connection, it can be said, “A man in the street can be forgiven, but a Harvard university professor cannot”.  Ideologically driven historians must also take share of the blame, for example. Exaggerating the past or suppressing the past are two cardinal sins practiced by historians at the opposite ends of the ideological spectrum.  Scientific audits must be carried out from time to time by well-versed and competent professionals, an whistle blowing is also necessary. According to Edward Snowden, who exposed several high-profile scams, a whistleblower may be defined as someone whose conscience goads them to expose or act against an institution that has violated its duty to the public. In addition, Martha C. Nussbaum, an eminent American philosopher, warns that a "go along to get along" approach and attitude that discourages proactive whistle blowing can eventually lead to systemic institutional failure. Dedicated and committed individuals must act as watch dogs and conscience keepers for scientific activity, just as there are other conscience keepers for witches in Christianity and untouchability in Hinduism. We would actually recommend that a dedicated group of researchers commit themselves to the cause, in addition to their discharge of other scientific duties, roles and responsibilities, as may be required. This can be done as a part of continuous post-publication reviews of papers, or otherwise. [4]

However, good and socially appropriate science is of paramount importance. As Wernher Von Braun once said, “Science itself is neither good nor evil. Its power depends on the hands that wield it. A discovery can heal millions, or cause widespread destruction. The real question isn’t therefore, what science can do, but what humanity chooses to do with it.”  This statement must be viewed in light of the dangerous culture of pseudoscience that is brewing in many different parts of the world, including both the developing world and the western world. Let us conclude with a quote by Yuval Noah Harari, the eminent Israeli researcher and scientist, “The truth is almost always complicated, difficult to comprehend or understand, not very flattering, and on some occasions even painful. However, arriving at the truth is a central component of human an societal progress, and for arriving at the truth, a great deal of time, energy, expertise, and commitment are required, including fact checking and data validation, data corroboration, and complex investigations. On the other hand falsehoods and lies can come very cheaply, and propagate very easily because can say whatever they want as long as it is emotionally very appealing.  There is also a very dangerous and very likely possibility that falsehoods will triumph unless we make a concerted effort to discover and promote the truth. This naturally requires institution building as well, and almost nothing is possible without it.” [5] [6]   [7]

---

[1] Wootton, David. The Invention of Science: A New History of the Scientific Revolution (Penguin, 2015). p.136

[2] Reigniting public trust and public confidence in science: Why high quality science alone will restore trust in science and wipe out pseudoscience, Sujay Rao Mandavilli, SSRN, 2025  

[3] Bowler, Peter J.; Morus, Iwan Rhys (2020). "The scientific revolution". Making Modern Science (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 25–57

[4] Löwe, Benedikt (2002). "The Formal Sciences: Their Scope, Their Foundations, and Their Unity". Synthese. 133 (1/2): 5–11

[5] Mainstreaming continuous post-publication review in science: Yet another milestone towards high-quality science, Sujay Rao Mandavilli, SSRN, 2025

[6] Laying the Foundations for Ethical, Unbiased and Substantive Reviewing of Research Work: Providing the Theoretical Foundation for Superior Science

[7] Cataloguing The Sacred Duties of a Researcher Towards Science, Society and the Education System: A Necessary Adjunct for Progress in the Twenty-First Century and beyond

 

Shoutout to prominent archeologists and anthropologists on highly doubtful early Iron age claims in Tamil Nadu

 

Shoutout to prominent archeologists and anthropologists on highly doubtful early Iron age claims in Tamil Nadu

Dear Sirs,

In the early part of 2025, The Chennai based Frontline magazine published a series of widely publicized cover stories suggesting how new archaeological evidence in Tamil Nadu completely rewrote global and Indian Iron Age timeline backed by claimed evidence from sites such as Mayiladumparai, Adichanallur, and Sivagalai, all located in Tamil Nadu state. This was based on an article released by the Tamil Nadu State Department of Archaeology which was titled “Antiquity of Iron: Recent Radiometric Dates from Tamil Nadu”, which claimed that iron was actively used in Tamil Nadu from 3345 BC, which interestingly is placed a couple of decades before the start of the Kot Diji phase, or the early Harappan phase. We do not know if this is purely coincidental or not. This pushes the origin of the Indian Iron Age back by more than a millennium and a half and also turns long-held global archaeological paradigms and axioms on their head. The standard textbook theory is that iron smelting technology emerged from copper smelting in Anatolia somewhere between 2000 BC and 1200 BC, which Frontline wants to negate in a gungho fashion. All of this must be construed as rampant sensationalism of the highest order, though critics are welcome to negate our assertions. Mainstream researchers, including metallurgy experts such as David Killick, note that iron smelting developed incrementally and in stages from copper smelting in regions like Anatolia which equates to modern Turkey somewhere between 2000 BC and 1200 BC. This is the standard textbook narrative.

But what exactly is pseudo-archaeology? Pseudoarchaeology refers to the use of distorted data or highly biased and flawed methods in order to generate fake and dubious narratives regarding the past—it is dangerous because it damages science, society and the education system heavily, and leads to dubious narratives being mainstreamed if not kept or held in check.  In some cases, these are linked to wholly dubious pseudo scientific narratives such as Atlantis and Lemuria which have been long discarded. Pseudo archeology is mostly derived from a fervent and feverish desire to boost sectarian pride, and proponents of such theories often revel in conspiracy theories or resort to persecution complexes to justify their claims. One theory claims that there were ancient aliens at Palenque- This theory was proposed by Erich von Daniken in his book “Chariots of the Gods”, but he was clearly a fraudulent writer.  The Piltdown man hoax was a famous early twentieth century hoax proposed by Charles Dawson, but it was eventually and ultimately exposed, and brought to light though a great deal of damage had been done to science in the process. In India, fallacies abound; for example, some people wish to treat the great Indian epics literally, though Sanskrit literature obviously contains more than a nugget of historical information – as accepted by Dr Michael Witzel of Harvard university and others. During the period of feverish historical revisionism in India some twenty years ago, an eminent Indian magazine carried a much publicized cover story claiming that a lost civilization had been found in the Gulf of Cambay, and it was some 9000 years old. This was based on the alleged discovery of a sherd. This is obviously a fallacy, but the Frontline magazine is intentionally falling into the same trap, and causing the same degree of harm to scientific temper. History in India is often seen as a ding-dong battle between the left and the right, i.e north and south India (i.e “Aryan” versus “Dravidian”, and much of the faultlines are ideologically driven.

There is a great deal of skepticism regarding Tamilnadu’s Iron age claims, and this magazine is obviously setting a dangerous trend and compromising severely with scientific temper. It is a clear case of rewriting history using decibel and fake propaganda. Most archaeometallurgists argue that an Iron Age date around the fourth millennium BCE before Christ skips or bypasses the copper age transition and predates established global smelting frameworks. Extraordinary claims obviously require extraordinary evidence. It has also been pointed out by skeptics that early radiocarbon dates can be flawed if there is a contamination from charcoal or other substances produced from burning wood, which would obviously cause errors to be generated, and these would point to a date of the age of wood itself. Of course, objectivity in mindset is required if error-proof research is to be generated, and this is obviously in short supply. Technologies do not pop up in isolation, and such isolated claims negate well accepted theories of cultural diffusion, which means that artifacts would have spread to neigbouring parts of south India and elsewhere. Why did this not happen? Why did even the much more advanced Harappans move into the Iron age when they were situated between South India and West Asia? There was also no advanced urban civilization in Tami Nadu in 3345 BC, and what was the motivation to produce such “advanced” Iron technologies as Dr Sharada Srinivasan has claimed? Iron smelting requires controlled smelting at temperatures well above one thousand degrees Celsius which rural folk many not have been able to achieve. Moreover, why did they not transition from a copper or a bronze age when the technology was already available in North west India? Others criticize the methodology of taking the fringe and earlies over-ambitious radio carbon dating readings from a sample instead of getting them verified by a large or a broad cross-section of experts from around the world. Samples taken from same data sets in the above mentioned sites in Tamil Nadu yielded widely different dates, (many as recent as after 1500 BC) and this makes the whole methodology highly suspicious and dubious – also driven by a false subregional pride rather than skepticism and scholarly objectivity. Also, furnaces and workshops have not been unearthed, along with other supporting infrastructure which would have been so essential for such a culture to evolve and reach maturity.

Most likely, southern India had not even entered the Chalcolithic age at the time, Such isolated and random carbon dating is not accompanied by a widespread evidence of actual large-scale iron-smelting infrastructure or major societal shifts that must be associated with such claims. Such claims are clearly therefore being conflated with Dravidian identity politics, and many claims are highly extravagant or ambitious in scope.  Most ideologically driven proponents are not interesting in what is factually correct, but take refuge in fake narratives driven by a high degree of shrill sensationalism and chest-thumping. No pan India integration is attempted (neither is a broader integration attempted across regions) only a crude north India versus south India rivalry. Of course, Tamil Nadu has a rich and glorious past, and this cannot be disputed. They had early major dynasties, the Sangam age, and brief territorial expansion into North India and South East Asia Why cannot all this be highlighted, as a part of Tamil identity and pride? Rakesh Tiwari states that Iron originated in North India much, much later, around 1800 BC (even this date may be slightly over-ambitious) from a west Asian origin. Some other early iron artifacts have also been dated much later to the second millennium before Christ in regions like Ahar-Banas in Rajasthan, the Central Ganga Valley, and in Malhar.

There are several critics of Frontline magazine’s claims. For example, Prof. David Killick who is an international archaeometallurgist who reviewed the radiometric data for the findings expressed deep skepticism, arguing for terminal dates between 1300 BC and 1800 BC for the development of iron technologies, and calling such early dates even outrageous and shocking. Prof. Parth R. Chauhan who is an archaeologist at IISER has also expressed a high degree of skepticism. There is also a great deal of skepticism from the Archeological survey of India. The Archaeological Survey of India has raised red flags over the methodology adopted and has called for exercising a great deal of restraint. The ASI has also criticized the practice of making massive press announcements to sway public opinion, in lieu of robust and rocksolid research. ASI vetting experts also note that the claimed and postulated fourth millennium BC dates may have been primarily obtained from Accelerated Mass Spectrometry (AMS) and Optically Stimulated Luminescence (OSL) from organic charcoal, ceramic bits, and paddy husks pulled from surrounding soil layers, rather than from the iron objects themselves. This is highly fallacious and misleading to say the least. ASI experts also point out that many southern urn-burial sites are known for being heavily disturbed or highly stratified. In such cases, older charcoal fragments routinely invade younger layers, leading to erroneous results being obtained. It was again noted that a variety of objects found close together have yielded widely different dates defeating the theory of cohesiveness. The absence of furnaces and ovens was again highlighted, and this is highly concerning.

Why we are critical of Frontline’s claims in addition to the fact that such timelines are highly implausible. The following are our twelve major reasons.  

1.       Such claims have been made from mainstream media outlets such as Frontline, and mainstream media must not commit cardinal errors

2.       Mainstream media’s association with a non-scientific ideology i.e. association with Dravidian nationalism raises cause for alarm

3.       Prominent Tamilnadu state government departments are involved such as the state department of archeology

4.       Association with obsolete paradigms, obsolete intellectualism and academic Marxism is another cause for concern

5.       Possible association with pseudoscience and pseudo archaeology

6.       Attempts to sensationalize  and approach the uneducated public first thorough massive media engagements, instead of forging a consensus among specialists sets a dangerous trend and precedent

7.       Attempts to mainstream narratives in academic institutions in an underhand fashion damages science, society and the education system very badly

8.       Fostering a culture of non-objectivity in general is extremely dangerous and antithetical to science

9.       Setting a bad trend and example: This sets a bad trend and example for others to follow

10.   A very serious affront on scientific temper: This is a very serious affront on objectivity and objectivity in mindset

11.   Needs validation by a variety of experts: Experts from a wide variety of fields must validate or disprove Frontline magazine’s claims  

12.   Prevent recurrence of events of a similar nature: Such nefarious chauvinistic and parochial tendencies must be nipped in the bud before they raise their ugly head in future  because they set a bad example for rival groups as well

As we have always observed, “ one kind of biase legitimizes every other kind of bias

Warm regards,

Sujay Rao Mandavilli

Founder director

Institute for the study of the globalization of science

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is automation of education possible even in the long-term?

 There’s a lot of automation that can happen that isn’t a replacement of humans, but of mind-numbing behavior.

~ Stewart Butterfield

”The first rule of any technology used in a business is that automation applied to an efficient operation will magnify the efficiency. The second is that automation applied to an inefficient operation will magnify the inefficiency.” —Bill Gates

The objective of this article is to critically examine whether automation of education, either fully or partially will be viable or feasible in the long-term. We begin this article by defining what pedagogy is, and tracing its origin, history and development over time. We then examine language acquisition theories, both first and second, and how they have either impacted or been constrained and limited by pedagogical concepts and pedagogical theory.

We also then review much more recent concepts such as educational technology and computer-based education and review and trace their history. The role of artificial education in education which has greatly increased is also examined, along with an examination of its current successes, limitations and challenges in the field of education. The importance of ethnography and its role in pedagogy, along with a review and examination in carrying out evidence-based, data-driven and metric-driven outcomes is also carried out.

The cons of automation of education are also reviewed, and the need for a human touch, and a practical and a pragmatic approach reiterated and emphasized. The role and the importance of educational infrastructure in realizing such goals is also emphasized, and we conclude that we have a long way to go before dreaming of such goals. A meaningful and a comprehensive debate can of course, be constituted rightaway. The time is already ripe for this. We hope and expect that this article will be an important cog in the wheel of our globalization of science movement, and can help is critically analyze whether, such approaches can drive education in developing countries in the long term, and optimize human capital.

If done, it can achieve perhaps miraculous results, though only when the times comes for it. Let a million scholars bloom! Let a million intellectuals bloom! Let a million scientists bloom! Let a million though leaders bloom! If not today, at least tomorrow.

What is pedagogy?

The word pedagogy which refers to the art and science of teaching and learning is said to have had its origins in the ancient Greek words “paidos” (meaning child) and “agogos” (meaning leader). According to another alternative expression, the word breaks down into the two Greek words as follows: “pais” (meaning, “of a child”) and “agogos” (meaning “leader”).

Thus the word “pedagogy” therefore refers to the act of leading and guiding a child. The Latin word for pedagogy is “paedagogia” which in turn is said to have been derived from the aforesaid Greek word “paidagogia”, which means “escorting or sending a child to school”. Pedagogy is therefore commonly understood the theory and practice of teaching in learning, the isolation and identification of optimal teaching and learning practices and methods, and how this process influences, and is also in turn influenced by, various social, political, and psychological preferences of learners.

Some other aspects such as the interaction between students and teachers, and student and learner psychology are also researched. It has also been instituted as an academic and a scientific discipline, and is formally taught in universities and academia all over the world, particularly in the west. It is particularly for this very reason, that concepts and frameworks in pedagogy are somewhat Eurocentric in their orientation.

However, many aspects of pedagogy remain poorly researched, particularly learning outcomes, and learning abilities of students in non-western contexts, by socioeconomic group, sociocultural group, learning needs and outcomes of children with special needs and different abilities, and the relationship between learning outcomes and economic outcomes. Non-formal instruction such as on and off the job skilling and vocational training are also sometimes formally adjudged and evaluated.

History of Pedagogy

The early history of formal and informal education remains fairly hazy and nebulous to this very day. This may be in large part due to the fact the there is a dearth and a paucity of evidence, and also because the topic remains very poorly researched to this day. Early humans, particularly in pre-literate and pre-Old World Civilizations, apparently were not imparted any form of structured education at all, apart possibly and probably basic life skills, tool making and later on in the Upper Palaeolithic age, and the Neolithic age, agriculture, some arts and crafts, and a formal structured approach to education is a relatively recent phenomenon, particularly one that is monitored and studied closely.

We still have some more way to go before it can become a cogent and a coherent discipline. i.e. a data-centric and data-driven discipline. According to some researchers, the earliest formal school in any sense of the term was launched in Ancient Egypt’s middle kingdom under the supervision of Kheti, who was a treasurer to Pharaoh Mentuhotep II. Formal training may also been imparted to a very small number of elite scribes in both Mesopotamia and Egypt who were privileged to be allowed to read, write and use early hard and difficult to master scripts such as hieroglyphs, and cuneiform.

There was also probably no education for women for much longer who were typically assigned more mundane, tedious and repetitive chores, and given secondary status in society. There may have been some form of a formal or a quasi-formal training for Indus Valley administrators (by inference) but there is no way to attest to this, or reliably prove this.

In the Vedic period of Ancient India which may also be referred to as the Post-Harappan period in view of the multiplicity of cultures present in the region, Vedic knowledge along with some kind of medical knowledge was taught. The Upanishads and other literature may also have been taught along with archery and other arts, and most of the knowledge there transmitted orally, in spite of the prevalence of limited literacy in the region.

A Gurukul system of education where students learnt from a preceptor in the latter’s place of residence, also existed and is attested to in some later tests, but was limited to small groups of people. During the Zhou dynasty of Ancient China which ruled from between the tenth and the third centuries before Christ, there were national schools which taught different arts, and imparted different skills such as rituals and rites, horse riding music, archery, chariot riding, drawing, painting, calligraphy and mathematics.

In other early civilizations such as Greece, education was both public and private, though Greek civilization made enormous strides were made in science, arts, literature, and mathematics. The accomplishments and achievements of Greek civilization continue to be widely respected and admired to this day.

The earliest versions of modern universities were established in Western European nations such as England, Italy, and France between the eleventh and the twelfth centuries, teaching theology, science, arts, law, commerce and medicine. Some scholars consider these early universities to be midway between monastic schools or monasteries, and full-fledged or comprehensive modern universities. Great Islamic centres of learning were also established after the eighth century, and Islam also had its own golden age between the Eighth and the Fourteenth Centuries.

The Islamic golden age was a period of cultural, economic, and scientific renaissance with progress in science, medicine, astronomy, art, and philosophy. Modern universities are a mix of all these concepts, though many changes have indeed taken place since then. India and China also continued to prosper, thrive and flourish, though Japan and other countries were cut off from the outside world. Mass literacy levels however, were abysmally low even in the west till the 1600’s, but increased gradually in the 1700’s and the 1800’s, as the renaissance and the enlightenment took root.

This pattern of increase in public literacy levels was not duplicated in many other parts of the world till much more recently. The Japanese education system emulated the Western Education system after the Meiji restoration of 1868 which led to the emulation of western concepts. Likewise, a Western style education was introduced in India in the 1830’s based on recommendations by Lord Macaulay. While this may have benefited India greatly, some xenophobic elements want a partial reversion to the old Gurukula system of ancient yore. Education was made compulsory in most European countries only in the 1800’s and the USA eventually followed suit. By the year 1900 AD, literacy levels in the west hovered at around the 90% mark, while the rest of the world lagged badly behind with low literacy rates, and non-existent intellectualism. Today, virtually all countries in the world have made education mandatory, with varying quality of education by region. Developing countries are slowly catching up with the developing world with falling illiteracy rates, though there are indeed many variations.

There was an great interest in educational methods, tools, approaches and techniques in the Eighteenth and the Nineteenth centuries and several attempts were made to evaluate, compare and rank different teaching methods and create academic rationales became a true science in its own right. We need renaissances and enlightenments in the East, and that appears to be taking much longer than anticipated or expected. Pedagogy itself needs to be reinvented, and modernized though there is not much conceptual clarity yet on this vital score. Twenty first century skills also need to be taught to students such as analytic reasoning, complex problem solving, communication skills, practical learning and teamwork, interpersonal skills, as opposed to mere knowledge-based academic skills.

Concepts in pedagogy

Many different definitions have been proposed for the term “pedagogy”. According to a definition provided by the erudite scholar and thinker Giovanni Genovesi: “Pedagogy is an autonomous science because it has its own language and is aware of how to use it according to its own method and its own ends and, by this language, pedagogy generates a body of knowledge, a series of experiments and techniques without which any construction of education models would be impossible.” Indeed the term pedagogy is now a very wide-ranging and a very encompassing term covering a wide range and a breadth of topics such as educational content, teacher training, teacher remuneration, and motivation, learner psychology and student behaviour, and student motivation. Pedagogy may be construed as both a theoretical and an applied science, and straddles both realms in equal measure.

Many different learning theories, approaches and models have been applied across the course of the history of pedagogy, and some have eclipsed others during the long course of its history.

Learning theories are therefore, conceptual frameworks that attempt to understand and analyze how students acquire, absorb, retain, assimilate, digest and process knowledge during the process of formal and informal learning. According to many early and classical theorists such as Plato of Ancient Greece and later, the English philosopher and famous and eminent physician John Locke, learning was a continuous process, with knowledge built like an edifice or a house of bricks upon more basic rudimentary concepts; Therefore, foundational knowledge is very important in determining or dictating the course of affairs – John Locke also proposed the idea of tabula rasa or blank slate, where knowledge was continuously built upon an empty or a blank slate. Knowledge is acquired through a process of enculturation or acculturation, and knowledge acquired from endo, meso, and exo environments.

The first formal chair of pedagogy was established at the University of Halle in Germany in the second half of the eighteenth century. Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi of Switzerland and Joseph Lancaster of Britain also pioneered the study of pedagogical techniques formally and scientifically. Under the supervision and guidance of Wilhelm von Humboldt, the university of Berlin was founded in 1809 which quickly and rapidly became a model for other universities in Europe to follow. Johann Friedrich Herbart played a major role in instituting Pedagogy as a separate and a distinct discipline), Immanuel Kant emphasized knowledge, human nature, learning, human values, truth, eauty, transmission of values, societal norms and opportunity.

Henri Bergson emphasixed on perception and memory, Edwin R. Guthrie emphasized contiguous conditioning, and Stanko Gogala emphasized cultural Pedagogy. The theory of Behaviorism was proposed by eminent thinkers such as John Watson, B F Skinner (Skinner’s theory was also known as “Operant Conditioning”), Edward C. Tolman (“Purposive Behaviourism” and Sign Learning), Clark L. Hull (“Systematic Behaviour Theory” or Drive Theory), and several others. According to the Social Learning theory, new behaviour is usually acquired in a social context by observing and imitating what others are doing. This concept was developed based on earlier work by Canadian American psychologist Albert Bandura and the eminent Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky. Constructivists likewise argue that learners interpret or understand new knowledge on the basis of what they already know, and that new knowledge continuously built over existing knowledge.

The Transfer of Learning Approach and Connectionism were by the American psychologist Edward Lee Thorndike and others. The Theory of Psychodynamics which is another important theory, was proposed by the Austrian neurologist Sigmund Freud who also additionally explored many other diverse topics such as psychoanalysis and hedonism. Other leading lumiaries in the history of education have been the American founding father Thomas Jefferson, who, way back in the year in 1781 published his views on education in ‘Notes on the state of Virginia’.

John Dewey, another highly influential educationalist, proposed the idea of functionalism, and was associated with pragmatism as well. Dewey argued that education and learning were mostly social and interactive processes, and students interacted with the curriculum, and developed their own learning processes.Margaret Haley, another educator of eminent repute, focussed on a child-centric pedagogical approach in the early part of the Twentieth century. Other influential figures in the field of education have included Daniel Payne, Paul Goodman, Edgar Z. Friedenberg, Herb Kohl, Alexander Crummell, Mary McLeod Bethune, WEB DuBois, Inez Beverley Prosser, Jonathan Kozol and Booker T Washington. Benjamin W. Arnett and and Daniel Hale Williams focused on learning for blacks, and John Amos Comenius supported learning in local languages.

We also had Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi (he formulated several modern principles in education), Otto Friedrich Theodor Heinsius, Friedrich Froebel (who proposed the idea of Kindergartens), to Soren Kierkegaard, Max Stirner, and Friedrich Nietzsche, all of whom were great and eminent thinkers. These were followed by theNew School or the Alternative schools movement (which included, and James Herndon), George Snyder’s non-directive pedagogies (Snyders, 1974), Fernand Oury and Institutional pedagogy which focuses on the complexity of the learner and the unconscious factors which the learner brings to the classroom (Lobrot, 1967; Oury, Vasquez, 1967) and constructivism and contextual learning (This philosophy proposed by Jean Piaget, Lev Vygotsky and others, proposes an ontological perspective of how humans make an interaction in relation between their experiences and their ideas). Another important doctrine is contextual learning which places a great deal of importance of cognition and problem solving.

There has also been a gradual shift from a teacher-centric approach with a great emphasis on rigid pedagogical content to a more learner-centric approach. Other more controversial approaches to pedagogy have been the field of “Critical Pedagogy” which is based on works by Brazilian educator and philosopher Paulo Freire. This field ties learning with oppression and social justice along with other political realities and contexts. Another new area of interest is Dialogic learning which derives its power from egalitarian dialogue where validity of arguments and not authoritarian power play the most central role. Educational Psychology is another important interface between education and psychology, and this branch of applied psychology deals with the problems, processes and products of education. It also applies the psychological principles, theories and techniques of human behaviour in educational situations. In the 20th century, new promising trends in the field of education have included Montessori schools developed by the Italian physician and educator Maria Montessori based on a child-centric approach and development of Waldorf education first proposed by Rudolf Steiner. Language acquisition theories for both first and second language acquisition have been proposed. These include the Behaviorist theory, Cognitive theory, Nativist theory, Interactionist theory, etc. Theories must be split up into first language and second language acquisition theories, and English must be taught differently to people in developing countries or erstwhile colonized countries because it is not their first language. All these theories are driven by myopic and dyed in the wool approaches; There is no attempt to make them data-driven, leave alone data culled from diverse cultural contexts.. At the same time, we must foster a scientific temper. Pseudo science is still rampant- people still believe in flying rishis etc- all this must change. Please refer our earlier papers on pedagogy as well, which we have published over the years.

What is edutech?

Educational technology which is also known as edutech, or edtech is the use of many different technologies such as computer hardware, computer software, and concepts in and pedagogy to allow for smoother and faster learning. Therefore, educational technology combines both theoretical and practical frameworks not only from pedagogy, but also sociology, anthropology, and pedagogy, in order to arrive at a holistic, coherent, and a cogent result. Edutech comprises several domains such as computer-based training and education, online learning, mobile learning, and artificial intelligence all of which are designed to offer dynamic and pleasant learning experiences to the learner. If they are to be made into a winning proposition, they must also enhance leaning outcomes qualitatively and quantitatively. According to the Association for Educational Communications and Technology educational technology is “the study and ethical practice of facilitating learning and improving performance by creating, using and managing appropriate technological processes and resources”. Therefore, educational technology includes both the theory and application of the design, development, management, supervision and evaluation of technology in learning. It may also make use of equipment such as televisions, laptops, tablets, powerpoint presentations, projectors, whiteboards, mobiles, etc. Learning management systems and education management systems may also be often employed through the use of information and communication technology. Learning may be either online or offline, and face to face learning may still often be employed. Content is also digitized and highly standardized, and social media platforms may also sometimes be used.

Computer based education which was introduced in the 1970s albeit in a very small way, implies the widespread use of computers in education, often to achieve uniformity and consistency, instill and inculcate higher-order thinking and problem-solving skills. Uses of computer based learning lie in the field of teaching, mentoring, coaching, research, administration, etc. Concepts in computer based education include computer assisted Instruction for student instruction, computer based instruction, computer managed instruction, computer assisted learning, computer based training, computer managed learning, etc. Automations of lessons or tutorials, mock drills, mock exercises, training Simulations, instructional games, etch may be used not only for problem solving, but also to boost creative thinking.

There are many advantages of computer-based learning. Computers, unlike teachers, are available all the time the learner wishes to learn. Computers are never tired and can be used to provide instruction for many hours. It allows for the learner can learn at his or her own pace. Computers do not frighten students, and most students are at ease with them. Computer learning is also increasingly less expensive than conventional institutional education. Courses can be tweaked for different types of learning, and the learning patterns or learning styles of different types and categories of students can be easily accommodated. Many foundational concepts such as the fundamentals of mathematics, physics, chemistry, botany, zoology, etc. can be taught repeatedly, and students can go through the same course again and again multiple times, without any teacher fatigue. This will also bring about a great deal of consistency, reliability, quality, and repeatability. Time will also be freed up for higher learning skills, and this will lead to improved concentration and comprehension, encourages critical thinking. It will also facilitate distance education which can particularly be promoted in higher courses – quality content will then be available online. Virtual classes can be encouraged and promoted, and brick and mortar classes kept optional. Multilingual content can also be provided, and this will help students assimilate subject matter more readily, quickly, and easily. Students can also practice at home after school hours, and the lack of parental guidance may no longer be a barrier. This will help students from the lower strata of society. Improving quality of education is also extremely important as birth rates continue to fall. We already have distance universities in India such as Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), Netaji Subhas Open University, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Open University (BAOU), Tamil Nadu Open University, and Karnataka State Open University – the last one is a failed university. Even exams can be conducted online by making use of a proctor. In some cases, such universities have become successful and there has been a decline in traditional coaching centres based in Kota and other places. Gitam universities and other universities are also now developing fully digital classrooms.

Artificial intelligence is also being widely used in learning and teaching models these days, though its potential has not yet been widely tapped. AI in education allows for educators to develop useful simulations, conduct personalized tests, and adaptive exercises that are tailored for individual student’s learning patterns. It will also allow for recursive learning, personalized approaches, adaptive approaches to education, better quality of education, and an overall reduction in cost. it can also be used to promote mass literacy. However, on the flip side, it may allow for the automation of bad ways of teaching, may compromise creativity, and may compromise ability to think independently. The human touch may be lost, and Human traits may not be replicable in teachers. Human guidance is important, and morals, ethics, values must also be imparted.

Some progress has been made in the automation of teaching. A school in Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala has launched a groundbreaking innovation in education with the introduction of India’s first saree-clad artificial intelligence teacher robot named ‘Iris’ This AI-generated school teacher robot, was developed by Makerlabs Edutech. This robot is powered by a cutting-edge robotics and generative AI technology, and comprises an in-built voice feature that runs on an Intel chipset. This teacher was developed under the Atal Tinkering Lab project orchestrated by the eminent India think tank NITI Aayog, and aims to revolutionize traditional teaching. This humanoid is currently proficient in three languages, though its developers plan to extend its language capabilities to cover several other languages as well. Robot Shalu is another educational humanoid robot developed by the technologist Dinesh Kunwar Patel, from Mumbai. It can speak a total of forty seven languages, Indian and foreign. Teacher robots will improve gradually as technology progresses, and this is something we can wait for.

There are many advantages of automation of education. For example, the dichotomy between global north and global south can be brought down, and the causes for differentials understood between different regions and classes of people. This will help is institute remedial measures. Customization, tweaking and modification is required to assess the needs of students belonging to different sociocultural and socioeconomic backgrounds, particularly the downtrodden and the underprivileged sections of the population. Modification and cultural adaptation are also required in many cases. Pilot studies must be carried out, and pilot studies must be carried out, capturing a wide variety of parameters. It has several other benefits too; for example, it can help overcome linguistic barriers; It can help overcome poor quality of teaching; It an benefit developing countries in relative terms; It can help developing countries catch up with developed ones and even leapfrog them. It can help overcome racism of many types.

However, this may only be a long term solution. There must be reliability of power, and infrastructures must be in place. The infrastructure in Indian classrooms is pathetic and most lack blackboards, reliable water and power supply and toilet facilities. Other basic amenities are lacking, and teacher absenteeism is high. Solar power, and other forms of renewable power must be used, and persovskite and cadmium telluride based options explored. The PM Surya Ghar program must be implemented; it is still in its infancy. All schools must have reliable power supply, and the current dismal scenario of unreliable power supply stopped. We are not talking about just reliable power supply here, but 24X7 power supply. In many rural regions, power outages of upto twelve hours a day are common. Indeed, we need a power revolution in India, just as we had a telecom and a highway revolution, but this is decades away; Solar power can step in, and this is poised for a huge boom, and an exponential increase. We need to understand language dynamics, and the theory of linguistic expectation, and the theory of non-linguistic expectation. Linguistic ethnography must be used. To reiterate, ethnography is a widely qualitative research method that involves studying in order to understand their culture, social dynamics, and worldviews. It is yet to become popular in linguistics and pedagogy. In other words, more data-driven approaches are required.

There must be no technology for technology’s sake, and a human touch, and a practical, pragmatic approach must be maintained. A back up mechanism will always be required, and teachers must still be qualified and trained. The quality of training must remain intact, and good teachers are still a must. This is because teachers are mentor and, guides. They provide spiritual, moral, ethical, and practical guidance to students. Output based metrics and other quantitative and qualitative metrics must be gathered at regular intervals. We must keep learning recursively from mistakes, and course corrections are always required. Theories of pedagogical content must be developed and there must be no rote learning except for the foundational elements and the basics. In short, it is a brilliant solution, but the time must come for it. Developing countries like India must use it to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and close gaps with the developed world. More debate and discussion are required, and we have time to go till technology evolves. This gives us time to debate and discuss issues deeply. We request readers to read our earlier papers and our book on pedagogy. Automation may seem like an over the top solution, but it may become mainstream eventually. This may take several decades, and we must begin with colleges and universities first. Other streams and phases of education can gradually follow suit. This approach can be used to teach in either English, or it the mother tongue. Both have their own advantages and disadvantages, and the use of automation in either stream can have their own advantages and disadvantages. More and more research papers are required, and we can understand that education makes or breaks nations.

Automation can also solve many problems in this day and age of obsession with English education which has its own benefits and drawbacks. Many teachers cannot speak English properly – this is the biggest obstacle to English medium education. High quality teacher training is also required. However, bottlenecks will remain. Automated education cannot be a substitute for good quality teachers, particularly at lower levels of education. We must remember that teacher provide students succour; teachers provide students empathy; teachers shape moral values; teachers shape cultural values; teachers provide a human touch; teachers shape students’ personalities; teachers are specially important in lower grades. However, education can be gradually automated as students become more emotionally mature. Composite approaches can also be adopted. Government can also initiate pilot studies on the automation of education, and educationalists, sociologists, and anthropologists roped in as required. In short, it is a brilliant solution, but the time must come for it.