AJIN THOMAS AND TARUN SURI*
Background and intent
As schoolteachers we are often looking to create learning contexts that draw from real world situations, not just simulations of them, or even abstract learning left to extrapolation with examples in the classroom. It therefore makes sense to have flexible institutional structures and a curricular framework to accommodate such planned learning experiences. Annually curated field trips or study trips largely help fulfil this purpose, among others. Another such opportunity presents itself in the form of academic projects, through which subject or theme-specific projects lead to valuable exploration of different spaces and people that we may encounter. Field based projects not only have the possibility to enrich our learning by adding nuance to teaching in classrooms, but they also allow for first-hand experience and learning that bring forth complexities, often beyond the academic framework.
The Class 11 program at The School KFI is a rich mix of such trips and other activities that orient and sensitize students towards larger questions around society. The broad intent of this particular interdisciplinary study (attempted with twelve students of Sociology and Environmental Science in Class 11), was as follows: (a) to connect students and teachers, emotionally and intellectually, to a given area that is being studied; (b) to have an immersive experience; (c) to get to know our own neighbourhood; (d) identify patterns being observed and connect them to secondary readings/research.
Our attempt was to conceptualize, plan and execute an area study systematically. For this, we had to pick a suitable study site.
Choosing a study area
Proximity was the primary factor influencing our choice for the study, as it is the essence of what we mean by neighbourhood. Hence life around the school became the subject of the study. Next, it had to necessarily support the intersection of the two academic disciplines of Sociology and Environmental Science with which the respective teachers and students were involved. The two fields of research are inevitably intertwined, i.e., any region or area selected would equally yield to the study of sociological and ecological contexts. The nearby Siruseri Lake area made an ideal, visible and conventional intersection of both human and environmental aspects.
An additional point of interest in the study site came from the fact that the Thazhambur and Siruseri region, the location of the school and the lake respectively, is a fast-developing peri-urban region. The area has seen dramatic changes in the last two decades owing to the establishment and expansion of the SIPCOT IT Park, just a few kilometres to the north of the lake. Thus, the need for us, as concerned neighbours and stakeholders, was to understand this change and what it means to different inhabitants.
Preparation by the teachers
The two teachers, who were primarily guiding this project, had studied the lake environment in an informal manner in the past, engaging in photography, walking, swimming, etc. Additional visits made to the lake and the surrounding settlements helped widen the scope of the study and the possible issues that we may encounter. The resource people identified for the study were:
- A person from Pitchandikulam Forest, Auroville, who had been working for a year with the local community, actively helping in the restoration of the lake together with an NGO.
- An urban designer-cum-architect (founder of the Urban Design Collective), who had done a six-month-long study along with Pitchandikulam Forest, on the lake, and the people around, at the same time.
- A local resident who has been actively working for the welfare of the Irula community.
- An associate from Care Earth Trust, an organization that works with ecological restoration.
Relevant reading material was gathered from these resource people. Additionally, teachers also put together articles around related concepts of ‘commons’ and ‘access to resources’ to help sensitize students to issues, supplement conceptual understanding and broaden the scope of the study. Both reading material and resource people were introduced to the team at the beginning to allow for open observation and conversations during our initial visits.
Introduction to students
The introductory session began with the subject teachers sharing their personal connection with the lake and its surroundings and why they thought this particular area might offer a good learning ground. This was followed by a discussion on the necessity to engage with and understand our neighbourhood. Students were then encouraged to articulate how they would like to understand this chosen space, and what specifically they would like to do as a part of this process.
Some students took time to warm up to the idea, others were immediately enthusiastic. The initial discussion yielded to deeper thinking about the place and what it could potentially offer. Students expressed their interest in spending time in the area, talking to people, conducting interviews, and meeting experts in the field. The introduction was followed by two more student-driven sessions, to come up with a concrete sequence of events. The teachers facilitated the sessions by helping streamline processes, raising questions and letting students become aware of logistical constraints.
Observations from the field
Over six visits, each of them about three to four hours long, students and teachers went on quiet walks, observed the area, and conversed with individuals living and working in the area. The attempt was also to visit the places and people time and again, so that we become familiar to them and vice versa. From the initial three visits and conversations, we came upon questions that could be probed further with the help of research. Students discussed these questions in groups and addressed them to a resource person who visited school and spent time with us. Students’ research questions were classified into the following thematic titles:
- Governance
- Health and wellbeing
- Inequalities and communities
- Access to resources
- Ecology and the environment
To understand the research questions better, students worked on specific interview questions that could be asked to people during field work, and three more field visits were organized. The third among these visits was to various facilities in the area—the panchayat (local government) office, the ration shop, a government school, a nursery, and a health clinic. This visit provided our exploration with an institutional perspective.
These trips, which included observations and interviews, presented us with several challenges and possibilities. Among these was the challenge of getting students to warm up to the place and people and making the people there comfortable with a group of ‘outsiders’ asking to converse with them. We were able to see the many ways in which the field visits enriched and challenged the concepts we were learning in class. Across the days of field visits, teachers encouraged students to focus on the following skills: (a) non-intrusive observation and taking field notes; (b) having open-ended conversations with people; (c) coming up on research questions of interest to pursue further; (d) preparing questionnaires directed towards these research questions. This meant going to the field with much respect and receptivity, but also some scepticism.
After the field visits, individual field notes were formally transcribed and shared with others in the group. This pooled information made it possible for all to borrow data from each other and fit in missing pieces as required. It was interesting for teachers to be amidst a group of students discussing and critically cross-examining their transcribed notes. This led to identifying biases and brought different perspectives to each observation. Discussions also reflected contradictions in what different stakeholders had said about a particular thing; the process of attempting to infer reality from these statements proved insightful. It is important to note that information around political exploits, power and caste dynamics sometimes took centre stage during some of these discussions. Students and teachers were thus encouraged to perceive biases that may reside in the people spoken to as well as among the study team.
Students were also asked to independently substantiate, contrast or dig deeper into observations made in the field with the help of secondary reading and research. The study, along with an introduction, the intent, process, observations, inferences and discussions about their questions, referencing primary and secondary information would then be formally documented in the form of a written booklet.
The prolonged engagement with the project between June 2024 and January 2025 was interspersed with project related reading, trips, input sessions from resource people and discussions to sustain student and teacher enthusiasm. To move the project to a constructive completion, we have been considering the possibility of sharing our exploration and findings back with the community.
Some learnings and observations
Possibilities and questions
- As students and teachers of a school, what are the ways in which findings of a project such as this can be taken back to the field and to the people? Do we have an ethical/moral responsibility to do so?
- Research is often looked at as an individual process—something that each person has to do for themselves. How would it look like if the information gathered was shared with the whole group—so that a more wholesome knowledge-gathering is possible?
- We found each student leveraging their capacities to contribute— language, drawing, conversation skills, etc. Could trips have been structured or planned, keeping in mind these capacities?
- People we meet in the field may become valuable resource persons for the school.
Appropriate group size
- The small size of the group (twelve students) allowed for two teachers to comfortably keep track of things, ensure the safety of the dispersed sub-groups (consisting of two or three students) and have different conversations during field trips.
- The group size also helped teachers work with students individually to refine various aspects of their engagement with the project.
- It is also important to note that a group size that is too small (or too large) may not yield to vibrant discussion, with multiple and sometimes conflicting perspectives being brought to the table.
Support from others
- Despite some challenges in scheduling the project related events among the many other events conducted for Class 11 students, the cooperation and support of other teachers across subjects and sections of school helped.
- A flexible institutional structure that encourages teachers and students to explore such possibilities is something we were privileged to have.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful for the time that the various people we met on the field took time off from their daily lives and work to spend with us in conversation. A special mention of gratitude is due to the following people: Anuviya Anbuselvam from Pitchandikulam Forest, Auroville; Jayashree Vencatesh and Anjana Vencatesh from Care Earth Trust; Vidhya Mohankumar from the Urban Design Collective. We thank them for sharing their time, knowledge, and experiences with us.