AHMEDABAD, India — Q: What edge do American students have over their counterparts in Indian schools?

The movement toward educational accountability in the Bush administration made one fact particularly evident—that American education is in a state of disarray. For several decades, the margin in test scores between American and international students has only widened, with the U.S. lagging far behind in math and science. Historically, such a commitment to these subjects dissipated quickly as the Cold War ended and a period of American economic prosperity resumed. Just as in previous times of politico-economic stability, schools took to once again championing the arts and humanities. One noteworthy example in this newfound Pax Americana: increased patronage of the liberal arts curriculum.

In the 1980s, psychologists like Howard Gardner proposed theories that later rationalized new methodologies in pedagogy, prioritizing the creativity of the American student over his or her ability to perform under pressure. With the theory of “multiple intelligences” firmly in place, parents willingly took to shuttling kids off to soccer games, painting lessons, summer camps, and dance recitals. In high school and college, these interests turned into extracurriculars, which de-emphasized textbook learning but worked to contribute to the student’s growth as an individual. It is perhaps a luxury of America’s economic position that parents can afford to take such risks with their children, drawing time away from chasing numeric success and instead encouraging creativity. In India, if a parent is to pay for his son’s college tuition, that child must choose a path that ensures a secure and set future—not “the arts” And there is little by way of encouraging participation in extracurriculars. Time is better spent in the classroom or preparing for tests.

The college admissions process in America, while vastly overcomplicated, contrasts starkly with the narrow, month-long window in India, the date from which HSC (the 12th standard Board examination) results are released and the day college classes begin. In a nearly meritocratic fashion, colleges still award seats based on HSC results alone. But, of course, no system is impervious, and wrinkles like reserved seats for scheduled castes (effectively quota-based affirmative action), connections, and under-the-table payments can compensate for inadequate scores (although most do not have access to such advantages). With similar dialogue on high-stakes testing in America, no one is blind to the challenges the system in India poses—especially considering the anxiety, pressure, and suicides associated with it.

Nevertheless, this system is incredibly effective for what it intends: producing some of the smartest and most hardworking students of any country in the world, many of whom later seek appointment at elite universities (including Harvard) in math and the sciences. But at its core, Indian education praises by-rote learning, conformity, and standardization. It is an assembly-line approach in an industrializing country to produce not only goods, but its human investments as well. The most popular fields are the pigeonhole ones—with outsourced jobs waiting at the end, positions lacking creativity and advancement but with set pay and an accompanying glass ceiling.

In a country with so much potential, the Indian educational system fails at creating and encouraging leaders, instead quashing the creativity our own system champions among its youth. Many Indian students are complacent working for American companies in outsourced IT jobs, although many are far smarter than their foreign employers. Whereas an average American student may never match up to his Indian counterpart on the basis of test scores or work ethic, political, economic, and, most importantly, pedagogical asymmetry almost guarantees that the latter will end up working for the former. This sad fact of globalization, perhaps rooted in the investment each country has made for its future, shortchanges India’s students today, and therefore fails to effectively inspire this nation’s youth into becoming its leaders of tomorrow.


Ashin D. Shah ’12, a Crimson photographer, is an applied mathematics and economics concentrator in Pforzheimer House.