Opinion Language barrier

The ministry of human resource development is fast becoming everyone’s favourite punching bag again — and as it would appear, not without reason. It’s squishy, it’s squashy, it has no credible defence, for instance, against the charge that it is playing with the lives of large numbers of students in Kendriya Vidyalayas by removing German from the course in the middle of the academic year. That was its first blunder, but another followed: Sanskrit, imposed top-down, was widely perceived to replace German, till the ministry clarified that it could be replaced by any Indian language, in line with national policy.

Language policy in schools dates back to 1949, when state education ministers discussed a flexible scheme delivering education in both official languages and mother tongues. A Central resolution followed in 1968, which was reaffirmed in the National Policy on Education in 1986. Today, schools offer a minimum of three languages — English, Hindi and a regional language, or Sanskrit. The removal of German may arguably be in line with the policy that prescribes only Indian languages. But is the move appropriate, especially from a ministry that has been going on about the need for educational reform? This government also stresses skilling, and the export of skills is a natural objective. In a world with permeable borders, India’s human capital is already deployed across global language domains. The process contributes significantly to the national interest and should be accelerated by government intervention. Not by forcing Indian languages upon those who look forward to careers overseas, but by offering access to a wider bouquet of languages, both Indian and foreign. While Indian languages affirm rootedness, foreign tongues spell mobility.

Advertisement

The purpose of reform is to enlarge opportunity, not restrict it. A child who learns German in school today may get a nine to five job in Munich years later. A child who has Sanskrit too may become a researcher in Heidelberg, an opportunity that the first child may not enjoy. Today, young people invest privately in learning the world’s languages in order to become world citizens. The HRD ministry should help them by offering wider language options in school — by distance education, if necessary — instead of reducing the spectrum of opportunity, as it appears to be doing.