An Educated Resistance

The abundance of free time this summer and a few instances I had encountered in the recent past, have led me to write this piece. This topic is less explored, compared to other issues in the domain of education. The reason being our perception of the problem. Neither does it seem a 'threat' to those who administer it, nor is it unique to the individuals indulged in it. Such is the nature; quite normalized, and hence the stakeholders seldom seek to answer it.

What I wish to discuss is the revolting nature of students. Better put, an understanding as to why students resist authorities and regulations.

What I meant by the normalized nature of the issue is that it is quite common for students, be it in schools or colleges, to repel the restrictions in place. In this article at least I will not generalize this nature. So among those who do resist, some of them find such constraints a threat to their freedom, while the rest find them pointless. Now before you accuse me of hypocrisy, I will admit that I too am among this lot- like most of you. The rationale behind these administrative policies isn't well gauged by them. But is this always the case? Can there be meaning to such resistance? Rather than justifying/opposing such an attitude, I'm interested in learning the reason behind it. And that's what I'll further explore.

Let's begin with school. Right from a young age students are taught to obey instructions and comply with the rules in place. Now these might even involve day to day decisions, as simple as submitting an assignment. Assuming the child isn't interested or isn't necessarily able to complete it in the stipulated time, the only motivation here is fear. The negative incentive plays a key role in compliance with authority.But the same student who now attends college, isn't ready to comply. He/She believes a better option would be to negotiate/argue with the instructor, regarding the submission. In the case of denial, he/she is likely to declare the authority 'insensitive'. Now, this student might still manage to submit the paper, but fear is no more a motivator. Let me remind you that I am not considering this rebellious in nature; the concern might be genuine. What is noteworthy is the change in approach. To understand better, I read a few articles on the same. What I learnt and what was highlighted in those pieces was how we view authority, at different stages of life. The more independent we become (mentally atleast) the more likely we are to question decisions that govern us. And with teenage start our 'issues'.

Neuroscience says that the urge to rebel against control over one's decisions can be explained by connectivity between two regions of the brain - the parietal and frontal regions. And this connectivity gets stronger in teenage. This explains to an extent the resistance. And there is indeed more to it. Psychologists have noted that young adults are more likely to revolt against decisions that might infringe their privacy as compared to those made for a larger cause. One example of this theory is that students are more likely to go against a professor ordering them to work 6 hours on an assignment than questioning the authorities on early class timings. Both situations might cause equal discomfort, but the latter seems to be in place for the 'greater good' while the former is more debatable. Until a rational justification is provided, one is likely to resent such an unfavorable constraint.

So then is it only because of our biological/psychological changes that we resist authority? The answer is obviously no. Any regulation in an institute is in place as much for the ease of administration as it is for the requirements of its stakeholders. But at a micro level such rules are flexible. The timings of a particular class or scheduling of exams for instance are subject to change. Then, in such cases students' opinion/concern does qualify as a cause for revision. And in such cases, one can 'rise to the occasion' and enforce change. Especially when it seeks to solve problems common to the group. Some might consider this resistance. That line of thought isn't wrong, but neither does resistance have a negative connotation here. You simply resist the unfavorable.

I believe then it becomes essential to understand when a cause of concern can be considered genuine. It's not too tough to decipher this.

1. The number of people impacted: Is there a negative impact large enough for the current regulation to be changed? Think in terms of the proportion of students who might not be comfortable with the current scenario. Even though authorities consider the overall benefit, a few cases might be overlooked. And this needs representation.

2. General Consensus: Apart from those who have an issue with the constraints, do the others support the cause? Conflicting views among the group must be argued and cleared out well before notifying the authorities. The issue will seem genuine only if it is backed by the group as a whole.

Developing a better student - faculty relationship, and better communication with the authorities will aid our cause as students. But one must remember that however genuine the cause, it's representation determines how it is acted upon. A systematic approach paired with proper representation of the issue is what can turn a 'revolt' into a 'discussion' !