A NEET Blow to the Autonomy of Linguistic States

Ever since independence, the Union has always tried to accumulate more and more power for itself in all subjects of eminence – quietly and gradually cutting down the autonomy of the states. The subject of education is no exception. In fact, education is a key factor for development, growth and governance, and hence exercising control over the matter is key for any authority to hold on to power and accumulate more of it. The Union, time and again, meddles with the subject in such a fashion that it encroaches into the space of the states, one step at a time, seizing more powers with every single move.

Obtrusion through National Eligibility Entrance Test (NEET) is the Union Government’s latest fiasco. NEET is a common entrance test for admission to MBBS and BDS courses that starting from this year, will replace All India Pre Medical Test (AIPMT) and all entrance examinations to the above courses conducted by state boards and by private institutions. It will be conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE).

As we will see further in this article, in the long-term this will deteriorate into a situation, in which the Union holds complete sway over education, and controls and dictates all learning, and development opportunities of our children. Needless to say, this is quite anti-democratic in nature. The subject of education should be with the states, to ensure the jurisdiction of education remains much closer to people. It makes little sense to drive the all-important subject of education through a distant establishment completely disconnected from them.

As with any Union Government undertaking, support for languages has been a concern with NEET. When it was introduced back in 2013, students could take it up in eight languages, i.e., Telugu, Tamil, Gujarati, Marathi, Bengali, Assamese, Hindi and English. But this year, when it is made mandatory across the Union, non-Hindi students do not have the option to take up the phase one of the examination in the language of their choice. They can only choose between Hindi and English.

But the phase two of the test is being considered to be conducted in the above mentioned languages. The choices are still limited. There are already concerns that question papers could leak if they are translated to these many languages. Denying the choice of a language not just shows insensitivity towards non-Hindi peoples but also clearly demonstrates operational inefficiencies that were unwarranted in the first place.

Why is it that the Union, in most of its undertaking, time and again comes up with operational and executional excuses to deny support to other languages but has enough resources and forethought to support Hindi, any time and at any place?

Take the Railways, for instance. The Railways has enough money and resources to use Hindi in announcements, tickets, boards, signage etc in all non-Hindi regions of the Union. But when asked for tickets to be printed in Kannada, it either comes with the excuse of lack of funds or operational inefficiencies. The pattern with NEET is similar.

It would not be a surprise if in the near future, the CBSE board puts its foot down and says no more support for ‘regional languages’ in NEET. We often come across the rubbish argument that Hindi and English being widely spoken languages are generally understood by a majority across the Union and that other languages are either not needed or may be left optional. This has been the devious stratagem of the Union in administration and general policy making. Education is no exception.

Of course, the Union Government has expressed concerns over phase I of the examination being only in two languages, English and Hindi, citing the reason that it will impact students from non-Hindi states and those from non-English medium background. But it appears that the far-term vision is to gradually converge towards Hindi and English, rather than invest in all the languages in building strong higher education systems in them. 

That the state governments will lose all authority or control over admission to MBBS and BDS courses in their respective states is crystal clear. Take for example, the Gadinaadu Kannadiga and the Horanaadu Kannadiga quota in Karnataka. Will the Government of Karnataka be able to conduct tests and fill-in admission for these quota? Will the CBSE board or the Union Government allow this? Or can the state government submit a plea if it is not permitted as per rules? We do not know for sure. But the state will no more be able to freely take decisions in the interest of its people.

Also, how will the state governments ensure justice to poor and rural students, who mostly do their schooling in the state syllabi? The syllabi of the states are vastly different from each other and from that of the CBSE board. These students are already disadvantaged owing to lack of coaching and guidance. The introduction of NEET will leave them further handicapped.

The states will also lose out the opportunity at restructuring or remodeling the system with novel methods. If a state, for instance, wants to adopt an advanced method of testing, or introduce a new subject it will not be possible any more.

In the long-run the states also stand to lose authority over primary education. With entrance exams coming under the CBSE board, parents would want their children to take up the CBSE syllabus right from early years of schooling. So, this will ensure that there will be very few takers left for the state boards. And the state boards, with decreasing enrollments, will be forced to align with the CBSE board to remain ‘relevant’ and ‘competitive’.

With more schools moving to CBSE, Hindi will be taught more widely in the non-Hindi states. But these schools will not be bound to teach the states’ languages. While the influence of Hindi will increase, the non-Hindi languages will take a beating as lesser and lesser of the young generation of the non-Hindi peoples will have good reading and writing proficiency in their mother tongues.

States like Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, and Andhra Pradesh etc., did raise a few objections against NEET. But they have all mostly been related to operational issues. Very few, unfortunately, has been against what is fundamentally wrong with the initiative.

NEET definitely needs to be scrapped. But that is not enough. We should ensure that the Union leave education to the states and not get into running the affairs of the subject. That requires moving the subject, which is now on the Concurrent List back to the State List (education was in the State List, but was moved to the Concurrent List during the time of emergency).

This is what has given the Union powers to override the policies of the states on education. It is unsure if the current wave of protests will stop NEET. Regardless, the states and its peoples should identify this fundamental fallacy and work towards getting education back to the State List.

(Image: financialexpress.com)

Working on a Book on Challenges Faced by Indian Languages - Need Your Help

Dear Karnatique readers,

In Karnatique, we have always stood for linguistic rights of all language communities. The status of a language, with respect to the number of speakers, its geographical spread, its use in the fields of education, entertainment, administration etc should be immaterial when considering linguistic rights.

There are hundreds of languages spoken in the Indian Union. The status of each of these languages is different and the kind of challenges faced by each are quite unique. However, there are some challenges that are common to the language communities of India.

• Education, especially higher studies
• Violation of the linguistic rights by the Union Government of India

One of the major challenges is education. While it is possible to receive school education in many languages, higher education in Indian languages has still not been achieved. The work of building knowledge bases in Indian languages has not taken off. In Karnatique, we have always argued in favour of building higher education systems in the mother tongue and have discussed its benefits to the society, especially in the context of globalized knowledge-based economies of today.

Challenges in the use of languages in commerce and administration are also common across language communities of India. In the administration the Union government's language policy is a cause for concern. Article 343 of the Constitution clearly calls out Hindi, with Devanagari script as the lone official language of India. Succeeding articles, up till article 351, prescribe ways and methods to promote the language through law, administration and Union government controlled institutions - which is explicitly imperialistic in nature towards non-Hindi peoples.

In the past, several linguistic communities have protested against the Union's linguistic imperialism. The voices for linguistic equality in the Indian Union are being heard even today, and are only getting stronger. In fact, people belonging to different language communities are gathering at Delhi on the 21st of February, to demand for upholding of language rights. It is to be noted that 21st of February is observed across the world as the International Mother Language Day.

The states and Union Territories of India, having accepted the Official Languages Rules, and other so called goodwill schemes, like the three-language formula, have been suffering Hindi imposition for decades now. After the status quo following the protests in the sixties, the imposition of Hindi on the entire geography of India has continued to date.

People of various linguistic communities have not only come to realize the serious nature of such language issues in India, but have also come to appreciate the need for collaboration between language communities to fight against them. That several such initiatives involving multiple language communities across India have been kick started is proof of this rising awareness.

To take this further, we need to have a clear picture of the current status of various Indian languages, the evolution of the Union Government's language policy, its effect on all the non-Hindi language communities, and our future course of action to address the issues. This is important not only for people taking up the cause of language issues but also will help others understand the issues and better appreciate the efforts to address them. For this purpose, I, based on suggestions from friends and like-minded individuals, have decided to author a book on the subject of "challenges being faced by the languages of India".

But such a book needs a comprehensive understanding of issues of a large number of linguistic communities across India. Hence, an involved and long-term collaboration with all of them is needed for this effort to be successful.

Currently, I have begun to collate all resources available online, starting from the debates of the Constituent Assembly to the latest circulars / orders of the education boards of the state governments. If you are aware of any resource, document or research material that you think will help in this regard, request you to kindly share them.

Also, there may be many issues and incidents that may be specific to your state or language community and they may not be known everywhere across the other states. Request you to share such information as well. Many resources, including very crucial and informative ones, may not be available on the internet at all. Here too, your help is needed. Please write to me at sandeepkambiatgmaildotcom.

Mother Tongues Vital to Achieve ‘Higher Education in India – Vision 2030’

In 2013 Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) articulated a vision for higher education in India to be realized before the year 2030. Called Higher Education in India – Vision 2030, it recommends “goals, policy imperatives and implementation roadmap to make higher education boost the growth of India to become the third-largest US$10 trillion economy of the world”.

A Summit on higher education in India by FICCI held earlier this month, brought out a report on the current status of higher education and a roadmap for the vision. The report titled State focused roadmap to India's Vision 2030 "is aimed at developing strategies to align the FICCI Vision 2030 on higher education for the Indian states”.

To achieve the vision it calls out a few imperatives –

The report identifies three categories of imperatives – social, economic and intellectual – and recognizes crucial targets to be achieved under each category. The value of such categorization and targets is fairly evident and admirable, but it is also important to understand the merits and efficacy of the use of mother tongue or people’s language in realizing the three imperatives. In the developed world mother tongue is considered the bedrock of education but in the Indian Union the notion is conspicuously absent in popular public discourse. 

Consider the social imperative of achieving gross enrollment ratio (GER) of 50% in higher education. Studies have revealed that mother tongue based education has not only helped impart effective education but also achieve higher enrollment rates. Research after research has revealed that students learn better when taught in mother-tongue, and learning results are meager when the medium of instruction is a non-native language, more so for those from socially and economically backward sections. Hence, focus on quality mother tongue based education can not only help improve enrollment but also close the disparity in enrollments.

The report’s economic imperatives aim for a skilled and job-ready work force. Skills can only be built on a strong educational foundation, to which mother tongue is key. Low employability of graduates has long been a concern in India. A national employability study conducted by Aspiring Minds shows that the employability in the IT Product and KPO sectors, for example, are as low as 4.2% and 9.5%. One of the important reasons for such low employability is the lack of fundamentals required for a job: good educational foundation, comprehension skills, communication skills, analytical reasoning, creativity, conceptual thinking etc. Quality mother tongue based education can help better address these fundamentals.

The intellectual imperatives like high-quality research output and creating a world-class research eco-system also require that students be able to continue their higher education, including research in all subjects of sciences in their mother tongues. We have argued in Karnatique earlier that the highly innovative nations are the ones with higher education systems in people’s language. 

Of course, enabling our languages to be able to express concepts of science and technology, and building world-class institutions in them, will not happen overnight. But undoubtedly this is the only way by which we can achieve success as evinced by the success stories of countries like Switzerland, Sweden, Israel, Finland, Korea etc., which top the global innovation index. In these countries students have the option to pursue education in their languages at all levels.

The document clearly calls out the fact that most of higher education is under the control of the states and hence any real change or transformation can be brought about only by actions at the level of the states. 99% of an estimated 46,430 institutions of higher education in India are under the ambit of the state governments. 97% of the 21.8 million enrolments are under the control of the states. Also, 67% of public expenditure on higher education (INR 384.6 billion) is contributed by the states. 

In a union of states, as diverse and as heterogeneous as India, every issue should be comprehended and dealt with at the level of individual states. So, the report rightly understands the heterogeneous nature of the issue and recommends the shift of focus of execution from the national level to the state level to be able achieve any real transformation.

Since each state is different and the level of development in higher education is different, the report rightly recommends different action plans for different states. But one of key things for the states in the process of implementation is to consider the language aspect. This aspect can help address several issues with respect to 'access, equity and quality' that the report emphasizes.

However, the value of peoples’ languages in education has hardly been understood and appreciated in public discourse in the Indian Union, let alone being effectively harnessed. Hence the states need a long term vision and commitment towards the use of mother tongues in education, and to be able to realize Vision 2030 it is absolutely essential that they invest on the languages of their peoples.

What India Needs Today Is Linguistic Equality, Not Another Link Language

A news report published recently in The Hindustan Times, reports that the Samskrita Bharati, a non-profit organization associated with the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh, will launch an outreach drive to propagate the use of Sanskrit throughout India.

Does a nation require a common link language?

The report states that the organization’s one-day campaign called 'Graham Graham Samskritam' (Sanskrit in every home) is aimed at establishing Sanskrit as the 'rajbhasha', a pan-India medium of spoken and written language. While the idea of having a single common language as a means of communication still has many takers in India it is so old-school that many advanced nations have abandoned such policies in favour of providing equal rights and privileges to all linguistic communities. So, how long are we going to continue to fool ourselves that the Indian Union needs a 'link language' that will serve as some kind of a unifying factor?

It seems natural that nations, which are linguistically diverse should promote a link language to help facilitate communication across all its regions and also to serve as a national unifying factor. But as we have learnt from history, in the instances of Bangladesh, USSR etc., such attempts have mostly been counter-productive leading to frictions between linguistic groups and ethnicities, and have often resulted in disintegration of nations. On the other hand promoting different languages can enhance mutual trust between language groups and help achieve unity that national governments strive for. This can be seen in several countries in Europe like Belgium and Finland, where all languages are treated on par and the rights of its speakers are protected as a state policy. The European Union actively encourages fostering of linguistic and cultural diversities, as a way to promote integration between its member states.

How pragmatic is the promotion of Sanskrit in this age?

Questions of pragmatism and practical sense also arise. Sanskrit may have been used as a liturgical language by the learned few for more than two millennia in India but as linguists and historians attest, it (proto Sanskrit) evolved into various Prakrits more than two thousand years ago. These Prakrits evolved into the various languages and dialects spoken across the northern part of India today. What is the point in bringing back to speech (to whatever possible extent) a language that has already evolved into various languages and dialects? As we know it, speech is constantly under flux. So, even if one succeeded in bringing Sanskrit back to speech in a few groups and regions, it will inevitably change and evolve into different dialects in decades and centuries to come. Should one take up the Sanskrit campaign again then? This is not only so unnecessary and inefficient but also counter-productive. 

Instead, it makes a lot more sense to promote various languages spoken across the country in education, administration and in all other possible spheres of life. It will not only help literacy and education, but also help people obtain citizen services and official government communication in the language they are most comfortable with. Often, some people argue that promotion of Sanskrit will enrich the other Indian languages too, but linguistically speaking this is a false argument. Also, why is Sanskrit being taken to every home? Don’t these homes already speak their mother tongues? What is the need to oblige them to speak Sanskrit in place of their respective mother tongues?

How good is Sanskrit as the medium of instruction?

The organization has also submitted a proposal to the Union government, says the report, to continue to use the mother tongue as the medium of instruction between class 1 and 8 and move to the Sanskrit medium from class 9 onwards. It is scientifically proven that for a child there is no better medium of instruction than his/ her mother tongue. In this respect the organization's proposal to use the mother tongue in the primary education is right. But its suggestion to switch to Sanskrit medium from class 9 is not justified. The decision to use a particular language or languages of instruction in schools should, at the most, be left to respective linguistic communities. Linguistic communities may work with their respective state governments towards an acceptable resolution on the medium of instruction if needed. Recommending Sanskrit medium to the children of several hundreds of different linguistic communities across a vast landmass of a billion plus population, without the consultation of the communities themselves is not correct.

In Karnatique, we have always supported the mother tongue as the medium of instruction, for scientific reasons. Not just primary education, even offering higher education in the mother tongue will benefit the respective linguistic communities. For their own benefit, linguistic communities should work towards that goal. But trying to promote a different language, be it English, Hindi or even Sanskrit as medium of instruction will be counter-productive. It should be noted that no country has ever progressed by using a language other than people’s language in education.

Such proposals to the Union Government too are inappropriate as the Union represents all linguistic communities and not just one or two. Private organizations are free to promote any language but they should not go to the extent of violating linguistic rights of other linguistic communities. Encouraging people to learn Sanskrit and teaching the language through private institutes and classes are all fine, but promoting it with the intent of making it a pan-India language, especially by using one’s influence in the Union Government, in order to serve as a language of official use throughout the country or introducing it as a medium of instruction in education on various other unsuspecting linguistic groups is a mistake.

Undemocratic Amendments to the Constitution during the Emergency

Pic source: indiatoday.intoday.in

On 25th of June this year, the 40th year of the Union Government imposed state of emergency was remembered. There have been many discussions around the misdoings of the Union Government during the 21 months' long period of emergency. Several web portals ran stories highlighting what the citizens of present day India can learn from the period of emergency. What went missing in much of these articles/discussions were the changes to the constitution of India that were made during the emergency, and how these changes undermined the fabric of the constitution of India. Not only were the fundamental rights of the people compromised, powers of the states of the union were also taken away by moving some important subjects from the state list to the concurrent/union list. Education was one such major subject that was moved from the state list to the concurrent list, quite understandably without any debate. At Karnatique, we have always argued that education must be a state list, and in this article too a special emphasis has been laid to highlight the movement of education from state list to concurrent list.

Education in state list, as the constituent assembly had wanted
The constituent assembly chaired by B. R. Ambedkar had kept education in the state list. In the meetings of the constituent assembly, a member by name Purnima Banerjee had moved an amendment seeking to move education to the Union list. This move was supported by another member of the constituent assembly Brajeshwar Prasad. But, the move was countered strongly by another member by name Rohini Kumar Chaudhury. The move was finally not accepted by B. R. Ambedkar, and hence education remained in the state list. Rohini Kumar Chaudhury made a strong speech in the constituent assembly insisting that education be maintained in the state list, and a part of the same speech has been quoted below.

Sir, it seems to me to be an age since I spoke last. It is not that my tongue does not reach so long, but I loathe to speak in this House lest I impede the progress of the work here, but today the heart-throbbing speech of my honourable Friend Shrimati Purnima Banerji has aroused me from my slumbers. I come here not to appreciate the speech of my honourable Friend Shrimati Purnima Banerji but to oppose it with all the might that I posses. Sir, we have come nearly to the end of these Lists, I, II and III and what do we find ? What we find is that the position of the States are no longer States or Provinces, but they have been reduced to the position of municipal and other local bodies. All the powers have been taken away either in List I or List No. 3. It reminds me of the words in the Upanishad:

Poornasya Poornamadaya

Poornamevavasishyate. 

     After having taken out everything the same fullness remains : it is as if it is a full Moon. We are taking slices of the full Moon and yet the full Moon still continues as before. That is the position to which we have arrived after going through all these lists.' No power is left to the Provinces and the full Moon remains a full Moon as before.

The 42nd amendment
The 42nd amendment to the constitution of India was brought about during the days of the emergency. It is regarded as the most controversial of the amendments to the constitution, in India's history. Apart from editing the preamble of the constitution and attempting to reduce the powers of the Supreme court and the high courts of India, the 42nd amendment brought such sweeping changes to the constitution that many described the amendment as a mini-constitution. As part of this amendment, education was moved to concurrent list from the state list. It is nothing but a mockery of democracy that such sweeping amendments, ones that curtailed the powers of the courts and reduced the powers of the states, were made during the emergency period without any debate whatsoever among the representatives of the people of India.

The run up to the 42nd amendment
The constitution of India, as drafted by the members of the constituent assembly, had not let so much of power reside at the hands of one person. If the same form of the constitution had continued till 1975, the sweeping changes introduced as part of the 42nd amendment would have been impossible to make. The 24th amendment is what tilted the constitution from the original form towards the current form. If not for the changes made to the constitution as part of the 24th amendment, the 42nd amendment wouldn't have been possible, As part of the 24th amendment, the parliament was enabled to dilute the fundamental rights, yes, the fundamental rights of the people of India. Also, the courts were prevented from doing any review of the future amendments to the constitution that impact the fundamental rights of the people.
When the 24th amendment was made, those members of the constituent assembly who were alive at that time, came out and opposed the amendment. Several of the legal experts had called the 24th amendment as slaughter of the constitution.

Interestingly, both the 24th and the 48th amendments were made when the union of India was in a state of emergency. The 24th amendment was made in the year 1971, at a time when the Bangla Liberation War was going on and the relations between India and Pakistan were tense. The 48th amendment was introduced during the period of imposed emergency, in 1976.

There seems to be larger agreement that the imposition of 21 month long emergency, starting in the year 1975, was detrimental. There is also widespread disapproval of the 42nd amendment to the constitution. The present Union Government of India has made special efforts to highlight the excesses of the emergency period.

To undo the damages done to the constitution during the emergency, what remedial actions is the current Union Government planning, is not very clear. Honest attempts to correct those excesses will have to start from moving education back to the state list from the concurrent list. With that, all the centralization efforts in the field of education will also have to stop. The power to meddle with the fundamental rights of the people, needs to be taken away from the parliament. All the talk about emergency is good, but the remedial actions need to speak too.