In subjects such as Maths, Physics and Chemistry answers tend to be painted in black and white, but in the likes of English, History, Philosophy and indeed all of the humanities, the multiple theories and different interpretations of an issue present the opportunity to propagate a certain view that leaves students open to exploitation from lecturers who seek to put forward only one line of argument. The word ‘indoctrination’ might be too strong to depict such a procedure, yet at University there are undoubtedly times when a politically charged view of a topic is presented to students with the overarching emphasis on a particular line of thought.
Academics have dedicated vast swathes of their lives to a subject they adore, and it’s therefore no surprise that they seek to push forward their ideas. But this can happen on two levels; either in a manner which highlights all of the options including their hypothesis, or in a way in which the emphasis is solely placed on what they believe is the correct judgement. As a student, the former is the more desirable, yet sadly the latter has a tendency to occur as academics seek to profess their understandings of important issues to students, thus disseminating their work to a generation who have the potential to emulate them in decades to come.
In most cases this is acceptable providing that other material is covered, yet there remains a fine line between providing theoretical information and using University teaching as a manner of indoctrination. When literature, sources or facts are provided to support solely one hypothesis, then it raises the question as to whether we are receiving the rounded education that we deserve. When such snippets of information all support a theory or understanding held and propagated by a member of one’s department, then one has to wonder if there is an ulterior motive in the message presented by the academic. Do they simply want you to believe a certain theory since it was devised by them, or is it actually the only theory? Is it honesty or deceit?
As students of a leading University we are all intelligent young adults, and one might imagine that we should be able to decipher between the two. However, when an academic with twenty or thirty years experience is lecturing to you about a subject you only knew existed five minutes ago, it’s hard not to become enveloped by their mindset and their version of the ‘truth‘. At times, we are vulnerable, oblivious to the fact that we are being subtly persuaded that a certain theory is the one that we should believe, and the notion that the hypothesis happens to be that of the lecturer standing in front of you seems an irrelevance. Is this a coincidence? On occasion, maybe, but when it happens three, four or five times it makes you wonder whether this is no happy little coincidence, but that in fact you are being brainwashed into replicating the understanding of those who are teaching you.
Of course we come to University to be educated by some of the leading academics in the world, and seek to absorb their knowledge and draw inspiration from their enthusiasm. However, we are not here to simply be an audience to professions; minions who heed every word of their cherished advice. In twenty years time our generation will be advancing academic study, and if we are simply reiterating the ideas of our lecturers rather than challenging and developing existing theories then academic development will stagnate.
Indoctrination into a theory, argument or line of thought won’t benefit progression, it will only occur if we are provided a balanced overview of material which allows us to develop rigorous individual thought. In reality, if a theory is worthy of such lavish praise and high esteem then we will discover that ourselves and might even uncover areas for its improvement. We don’t need to be brainwashed or indoctrinated to do that.