Published Date: June 19, 2019
A thread on the internal conflicts & semi-hidden agendas w.r.t. Languages in the Draft National Education Policy. Let's start with undisputed truths. To enhance learning (in currently overloaded students), curriculum should be reduced to enhance learning & critical thinking
Another enlightened concept that all can agree on: Increased flexibility (e.g. choice of subjects), across a broader spectrum of subjects/areas (including arts, crafts, sports) available to students, will produce more well-rounded individuals who can flourish in diverse ways
Turning now to the language of instruction: learning in mother tongue is easiest,& therefore good policy. Agreed
Also, languages are easiest to learn early in life. Well.....now this is sometimes true: IF the language is widely used locally, OR mother-tongue related, etc.
And NOW the internal conflicts start! How is forcing 3 languages as early as pre-school consistent with the recommendation made above in 4.3 - Reducing Curriculum?
Why should one INCREASE Curriculum so early, especially if the 3rd language is abstract (not in local use)
And here's a section that is outright ludicrous! First, using English fluency as the wedge to spuriously fan the notion of "exclusion" (shameful!), and then the ABSURD idea that the use of English as an international language has fallen short of "1960's expectations". How so?
So now one wonders.....If English is such a poorly used language of limited potential, why did the committee issue this report in English?
And how could committee members allow such rubbish to be published in their names? Are they content to be low quality propaganda shills?
Now comes the twist in the tale. All that rubbish about English was simply to set up for HINDI AS A COMPULSORY LANGUAGE, within a 3 language formula you see!
Because if English is basis for "exclusion", then of course Hindi MUST be the ultimate unifier!
Whattan idea, Sirji!
And it doesn't end there. Hindi is only the first phase of this ploy. The end goal is, of course, SANSKRIT, with some references to other "Classical Languages" thrown in for cover.
Why a classical language not in current use (Sanskrit), instead of one in regular use (Tamil)?
This illogical draft policy does nothing to answer the fundamental questions Arignar Anna asked
1) Why should we need a 3-language formula if everyone adopts and enacts a 2-language formula equally
2) Why should a "majority" aspect become the default "common" aspect End.
Twitter Source: Click to View