India's longstanding three-language policy, a core element of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, has reignited debates across the nation. This policy, which encourages students to learn three languages, has been a point of contention since its inception in 1968. While the policy does not mandate any specific language, it subtly implies Hindi should be included, sparking resistance, particularly from the southern state of Tamil Nadu. The federal government aims to promote and regulate education through this framework, ensuring that at least two languages are native to India. However, Tamil Nadu remains steadfast in its refusal to implement the policy, citing concerns over potential Hindi imposition.
The NEP 2020, the fourth iteration of the policy, aims to provide "greater flexibility" in its application, asserting that no language will be enforced upon any state. This assurance comes in response to concerns from states like Tamil Nadu, which argue that the inclusion of their mother tongue, Tamil, enhances children's understanding of academic subjects. Additionally, English remains a crucial language for opening up wider opportunities for students. Despite these reassurances, Tamil Nadu has declined to sign a memorandum of understanding (MoU) to participate in the scheme, fearing that it may lead to an indirect imposition of Hindi.
"We have never said in NEP 2020 that only Hindi will be there; we have only said that education will be based on mother tongue – in Tamil Nadu, it will be Tamil," – Pradhan
The three-language policy's historical roots trace back to the 1968 NEP, which first adopted this formula. The policy has often faced resistance from various states, most notably Tamil Nadu. The state's leaders argue that an additional linguistic burden on students is unnecessary and counterproductive. The insistence on learning three languages instead of two has led to heated debates and exchanges within India's parliament.
"Students have enough burden in schools. You have to learn so many subjects, and on top of that you are forced to learn three languages instead of two," – Kanimozhi Karunanidhi
The controversy surrounding the linguistic policy has sparked diverse opinions across educational and political circles. While some view it as a mechanism to unify the nation linguistically, others criticize it as an undemocratic approach that raises language barriers rather than bridging them.
"Their only job is to raise language barriers. They are undemocratic and uncivilised," – Pradhan
Proponents of the three-language policy argue that it provides a balanced educational framework that respects regional diversity while fostering national unity. However, the intricacies involved in implementing such a policy across a linguistically diverse country like India have led to significant debates. A federal government commission highlighted this complexity by stating:
"No other problem has caused greater controversy among educationists and evoked more contradictory views from our witnesses," – A federal government commission
The NEP 2020 continues to uphold the three-language policy despite these controversies. The federal government's commitment to not imposing any language aims to assuage fears of cultural and linguistic imposition.
"The three-language policy will continue to be implemented" – The latest NEP
As the debate rages on, Tamil Nadu's firm stance against the policy reflects a broader conversation about cultural identity and linguistic heritage. While the federal government seeks a unified educational approach, states like Tamil Nadu advocate for preserving their linguistic autonomy and cultural distinctiveness.
Leave a Reply