People's Democracy

THE new NCERT syllabus follows logically from the Vidya Bharti paper presented for implementation by the HRD ministry at the celebrated state education ministers’ conference in September 1998, and seemingly withdrawn - at a formal level - when the ministers concerned refused to ratify it. Vidya Bharti is the premier body of the RSS in the field of education, through which the RSS lays claim to a national education policy, and seeks to represent the national education policy.

The claim to represent the national education policy is, for obvious reasons, integral to the claim to represent the nation, and to define the nation. This is the real significance of the Curriculum Framework document for school education and the new syllabus.

Otherwise, school education being a state subject, in practical terms the NCERT syllabus applies to a numerically small section of the school system, and the private schools and state governments, given the political will, can well refuse to implement it. That they have not yet refused to do so has more to do with politics and the unwillingness to come out in the open, than with legalities of the educational system, just as the ham-handed implementation of the syllabus by the BJP-led government is a political necessity for this right-wing regime.

Outside those directly concerned, few know that the NCERT is not a syllabus prescribing authority. That task is the responsibility of the Boards, the Directorates of Education and the State Council of Educational Research and Training (SCERT). The only Board that may be obliged to prescribe this syllabus may be the CBSE, which is controlled by the union ministry of human resource development. The HRD ministry has no authority over other Boards in the country, over State Directorates of Education and the SCERTs. It is a matter of great concern that the CBSE has been taken over by the RSS sympathisers, and therefore its capitulation to the NCERT may allow for a ‘national model’ syllabus that is saffron in content, but is not mandatory on those outside the system to go along with.

Secondly, all Boards, including the CBSE, are required to make their versions of the syllabus - adapted to their states in the case of state boards - available to their affiliated schools, well in advance of an academic session. This can hardly be seen as having been confirmed to, with April and the start of a new academic session just round the corner, the manuscripts for new books not even ready, and schools still not having received official intimation from their controlling authorities.

More important the new curriculum, representing a reversal of the long-standing and universally accepted national education policy, is being effectively implemented through the new NCERT syllabus bypassing Parliament endorsement, the Central Advisory Board of Education, (CABE) and state education ministers’ consent, despite strong criticism and protests over the authoritarian methods adopted and the content of the changes sought to be being implemented.

The new NCERT syllabus and its implementation through the HRD ministry, by default and through infringing on legitimate academic bodies, can be, and must immediately be stalled and rejected outright and in toto, for stepping on the prerogatives of legitimate bodies regarding academic matters.

The new syllabus is a reflection of and endorsement by government of the Vidya Bharti schools and their educational enterprise, mediated through the National Curriculum Framework document. Discussions in the media on the document, and the new syllabus emanating from it, have understandably, and for obvious and very urgent reasons, centred on the saffronisation of the history syllabus, the attacks on secular historians, and the erosion of history as a discipline. Yet, a perusal of the Curriculum Framework and the syllabus shows that much more is being attempted, and not just though the history syllabus.

History is the more important theme for them and for us, for the simple reason that it is integral to definitions of the nation, to the way we see ourselves, and envision our goals in life. But the ‘values’ so vociferously emphasised by the Sangh Parivar, pervade the entire syllabus and the ambience that is sought to be created around the educational enterprise. While the debate is centred on history, equally objectionable contents are being quietly pushed into the other social sciences and the languages syllabi.

That these values moreover are, very amicably packaged and reconciled with and used as justification for a wholesale denial of the right to education for all, is something that is being understated and has even gone unnoticed by most people who have shown concern over saffronisation of education. And certainly one must recognise that commercialisation and privatisation of education has its advocates even among those who are ‘shocked’ at the brazen acts of saffronisation of syllabi. This has serious implications for citizenship rights of the Indian people, and the constitutional provisions regarding equality.

The leitmotiv for the new syllabus is to bring education and all educational initiatives in the country in line with the political prerogatives of the Sangh Parivar. All institutions, whether madrassas or Christian missionary schools, must confirm to these prerogatives or ‘face the consequences’. What has been happening to madrassas and Christian schools is well known. Saraswati vandanas, pujas in memory of the dead in Gujarat, compulsory Sanskrit, and the emphasis on Hindi as the rashtra bhasha, are some of the ways through which the cultural ambience for a right-wing communal educational set-up is being legitimised through government orders in BJP-ruled states.

‘Value education’ permeates all texts and subjects, as the Curriculum Framework clearly stated, and the guidelines to the new NCERT syllabus reiterate. It is underlined that this value education is primarily religious in content, and prioritises the Brahmanical view of culture and morality. The ‘spirituality’ component of the "Nationalisation, Indianisation, Spiritualisation" articulated concretely in the Vidya Bharti paper rejected by state governments in September 1998, has been cavalierly smuggled into the new syllabus in the form of emphasis on Indian culture and heritage in the entire syllabus.

In keeping with these objectives the 'burden' of history on the young child is ‘lightened’. The child, it is argued, is made to dwell too much in the past. He/she needs to be more in tune with the contemporary world, which is done through introduction of such topics as terrorism!

It is no one’s case that education was completely secular before the coming to power of the BJP government, or that there was no divergence between what was outlined as national education policy, and its actual content on the field. But a statement of policy by government binds the government to a position, and obliges the government to guarantee a minimum degree of conformity with a written and stated official position. It can also then be held answerable for that position, and for deviating from that position. The education policy of earlier governments in its stated form was secular and committed to the promotion of a scientific temper, women’s equality, national integration and affirmative action in the case of those constitutionally recognised as underprivileged. The new Curriculum Framework, and the syllabus conforming to it, absolves the government of all such constitutional obligations and affirmative actions, to replace them with other stated official goals.

The prioritised guidelines and goals of the syllabus (for the secondary level for instance) clearly replace the above stated secular values with:

• education for a cohesive society,
• strengthening national identity (not integration!) and preserving cultural heritage,
• integrating indigenous knowledge and India’s contribution to mankind,
• responding to the impact of globalisation,
• meeting the challenges of information and communication technology,
• linking education with life skills, education for value development
• culture specific pedagogies.

Seemingly harmless if taken at face value, the syllabus reeks of chauvinism in the name of national pride, the inculcation of which is stated as one of the primary goals of education. There is no mention of equality, secularism, rights, or struggle, and only lip service to plurality and composite culture.

Clearly the new syllabus represents a regress and withdrawal in terms of the stated aims and goals of education. It also implements the directive of the RSS and Vidya Bharti inspired National Curriculum Framework through differential, unequal, and discriminatory syllabus content for the underprivileged and the girl child.