Pedagogy of Nepotism

“ye teacher favoritism karti hain” , “Shumaila tou ma’m ke cheeti hai” , “Fardad ko sir kyun kuch kaheinge…”

Sounds familiar? When I heard similar phrases like these I was in class 6. I never fully understood what it meant. Not because the word “favorite” was tripping me but because I could not comprehend the consequences of that phrase or it might’ve been that my innocence got the better of me and I never saw my teachers as someone who could favor one over the other. How favoritism gets translated into institutions and psyche of students is two-fold. One, in a class of 25-35 students (average strength in Pakistani schools) the teacher solitarily cannot focus on everyone. S/he picks a bunch or in some cases one student as someone s/he pays attention to or invests energies of devotion and compassion there. The student selected is usually one who is quick and smart in responding to teacher’s questions, most of the time high achiever and someone who easily facilitates the teacher inside and outside the class. When the other students notice this student, they immediately think that they are not good enough to seek the teacher’s grace/attention which is natural, given the pedagogical setting and depending on the student's age and requirement of that time. If the teacher is handpicking students on merit and giving them fair attention- this might not fall directly in favoritism but if s/he is ignoring other students or giving undue credits and marks to few selected pupil or dotes them with respect to other pupil, s/he clearly falls in the line.

Second injustice is institutional and pedagogical in nature; this practice within the ideal learning environment of a school/college/university instills within the student that this form of favoring one over the other is normal. This teaches students to seek validation from teachers by other means if they don’t get the favor by being the teacher’s pet. Leaking unnecessary information about other classmates to the teacher, acting as an informant to the teacher regarding other teachers or simply being a subservient pupil serving the teacher as a personal assistant rather than a student. It makes subjects governable, not students. The norms and values are being inculcated by practices and rewards forwarded for behaviors favored by such a pedagogue.

There are several other consequences. We come across now more than ever, teenagers and young adults who are pessimists and claim that this country would not work, the system doesn’t work. These kind of claims and statements come first because of observation of rampant nepotism in schools and colleges and also because some students have internalized the selective hatred for the teacher either because of their lack of trust in the paternalist figure who turned out to be unjust, given that teachers are usually associated with a paternal figure because of religious teaching and general ethical practices of society favoring the one who parts education, or it is simply because they want to place their blame and responsibility on someone else so they make this repertoire of teacher being corrupt in his/her meritocracy principles.

Some teachers want a following of students either to get professional limelight or a political backing. This not only puts the narcissist lecturer in the spotlight but also an environment of nepotism easily forms because the teacher will favor the followers rather than those who are unbiased and on campus for learning rather than politicizing or cult following. Behavioral and organizational psychologists have conducted research on learning patterns and they conclude that it’s the immediate observation of students of the primary subjects: teachers and other students that serves the foundation of learned collective behavior. Michael Foucault in his famous work of discipline and punishment introduces philosophy of how institutions and subjects within a ‘set framework of rules’ are shaped and reshaped because of the policies, doctrines and practices that ensure certain political conditioning and reasoning creating the objects of control. Although it might seem like a long jump from a mere action of favoritism in teachers to pupils relations to a bleak dysfunctional system of control, the one small foundational step of this behavior leads to believing the student is in the academy to woo the teacher rather than learning. The focus shifts from the substance of scholarship to things like power, prestige and protocol.