The new National Education Policy of India (NEP) 2020 was approved by the Union Cabinet on 29 July 2020 and outlines the vision of a new education system for 21st Century India. It replaces the NEP (1986) that was more than three decades old. The new policy is a comprehensive framework for elementary education to higher education, as well as vocational training in both rural and urban India. It aims to transform India’s education system by 2040.
The changes to be brought about NEP have been applauded on some counts, but a larger voice of dissent can be heard on college campuses as students and teachers unite in criticism against it. The dilution of DU’s undergraduate courses under the FYUP framework, multiple entry-exit system during undergraduate study and the introduction of Massive Open Online Learning Courses (MOOCs) are among some of the provisions criticized for having a detrimental effect on the quality of teaching-learning while ensuring higher dropouts by more vulnerable sections of students.
Most recently on 28th March, Delhi University witnessed a DUTA led dharna for the absorption of ad-hoc professors who have been long discriminated against, and in defence of quality public-funded education against the NEP privatization drive, with a protest march to parliament street held on 31st March.
While till now we have highlighted the drawbacks of NEP at the higher education level, it’s recommendations at the primary education level also have significant implications.
The NEP has emphasized on the use of home language/mother tongue/local language/regional language as the medium of instruction till Class 5, while recommending its continuance till Class 8 and beyond, in both state and privately-owned schools. The NEP has proposed a new three language formula which recommends that all students will learn three languages in their school, and at least two of the three languages should be native to India.
The rationale behind this is that the use of mother tongue will improve comprehension and learning outcomes, helping students to learn basic concepts more easily without having to deal with an alien language.
In India language is not just a medium of communication- it is laden with concerns of social and cultural heritage, along with forming the basis for regional identities and the political division of states post-independence.
Preservation of heritage and preventing regional languages and diversity from dying out due to disuse is a big concern. Language is a vehicle to transfer the culture of a place and diluting its importance can be viewed as an attempt at homogenisation of culture. Such attempts have vehemently been imposed, especially in the Southern states where there have been mass protests against attempts to impose Hindi.
English has been seen by some- especially in the North- as the language of the colonizers, an imperial vestige to be done away with, in favour of promoting other national languages and identity.
In view of these arguments, it would appear that the NEP promoting regional languages in primary education is a popular decision that is beneficial for all: accommodating group identity, affirming national unity, and increasing administrative efficiency (by promoting learning of other native languages, enabling better interstate communications). But this is not necessarily the case, and we must critically examine this policy and its impact, keeping in mind the socio-economic inequalities of our society.
The mandate for regional languages in primary education downplays the importance of imparting an English medium education on students. While the widespread use of English is a sign of Western cultural and economic dominance and imperialism, a result of conquest and imposition, we cannot deny that it is also a global link language.
The use of English in India began with the elite who adopted it during the colonial period to gain favour with the British and have a clear association with the ruling power. It continues to be associated with the upper classes and elite in India. It is an indicator of class and superiority. Lack of fluency in English, and the usage of Hindi and vernacular languages instead, is seen as inferior, unmodernized and “uneducated”. Lack of English language skills is considered a clear tell of coming from a rural or not-well-to-do background. The regional languages are inferior because the speakers are considered inferior- feeding into a colonial mindset. English fluency is a depiction of class and notions of superiority.
It is not just about social status; English language skills also impact economic opportunities and life chances. Non-fluency in English closes doors to employment in the corporate sector and chances of admission in higher education institutions. Application to Universities abroad requires English fluency tests as mandatory. Similarly, many central universities such as DU, which have the mode of instruction as English, require that it be one of the subjects studied in Class 12.
Just because primary education is being imparted in a regional language, there is no guarantee that secondary and higher education will be available to students in the same language. And if the same medium of education is available, the question arises whether the quality of education would be on par with that imparted in English. The lingua franca of the country should be equidistant to all cultural groups to create fair competition and opportunities.
English communication is more widely used globally. Resources in vernacular languages are limited but use of English opens up the learner to world opinions, with alternative learning resources beyond textbooks (like the internet) widely and easily available. Teaching-learning material too is available in few standard languages only, so investments would be required on educational content in most of the regional languages, including the tribal languages.
Language learning with native fluency is the easiest before the age of seven years, after which it becomes cognitively much harder to grasp. If the requirement for English is removed in primary classes, children will not be able to learn it with the same ease in higher classes. And while privileged sections from well-to-do families who can afford private schools will continue to have access to English education, children from economically weaker sections and marginalized groups that depend on government education will face the setback of lacking a foundation in English. English medium education too has different technical and scientific terms.
In this way the National Education Policy will inadvertently continue to perpetuate inequality as the privileged continue to maintain their advantageous position while those in the lower strata will be denied a fair opportunity to compete with them for jobs and higher education, restricting their chances at social and economic mobility. It is essentially cutting off the chances of underprivileged children at improving their position in life through education before they are even old enough to realise the gross injustice done to them.