Recently, the alarmist news was circulated that key concepts and segments, notably the theory of evolution and the periodic table, have been dropped from science textbooks by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) . The usual suspects took to social media to declare the death of secularism and scientific temper in India. The story received widespread global attention, including from Al-Jazeera, Deutsche Welle and the noted scientific journal Nature.
What was particularly concerning, in this case, was the circulation of unverified information on social media, which was further amplified by mainstream media. From one news outlet to another, the story expanded, sowing disinformation and confusion. This not only had an adverse impact on the reputation of the NCERT but also created scepticism about the country’s education system. The government had already been working to dispel the negative image of the country’s education system. No scientific theory is absolute — it can be contested. The latest debates that have questioned Darwin’s theory of evolution need to also be a part of the curriculum.
The updating of textbooks is a regular process carried out by the NCERT, but one needs to understand these changes are not random. They are undertaken in specific contexts. First, some changes were made to reflect the changing realities — these include the incorporation of content related to information technology and computers. Second, the textbooks are revised in accordance with the reforms in the country’s educational system. In this case, the landmark National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 is the torchlight — it “emphasises reducing the content load and providing opportunities for experiential learning with a creative mindset.”
The current process of rationalisation is motivated by another critical factor: The effects of the pandemic on the educational system. There was a colossal loss of teaching time during the pandemic which, in turn, led to loss of learning and increased the load on the students. This was also a concern expressed by the Parliamentary Standing Committee On Education. Therefore, the process of rationalisation was initiated to facilitate the “speedy recovery in the learning continuum and compensating time loss of students.”
The NCERT was tasked with the rationalisation of textbooks across all classes and subjects. The process accounted for five broad criteria: Overlaps with similar content in other subjects within the same class; similar content in a lower or higher class; the level of difficulty; easily available content that does not require much assistance from teachers and can be undertaken through self or peer-learning; irrelevant content in the present context.
The controversy caused by confusion and misinformation is self-evident. Yet, what’s surprising is the sheer absence of follow-up by the critics after the NCERT’s clarification. Three observations need to be made in this respect. First, there is a need to gain perspective and separate facts from fiction. The periodic table has “not been removed from school education curriculum” but instead reassigned to Unit 3 in the Class 11 textbook. Darwin’s theory of evolution is covered in “great detail” in chapter six of the Class 12 textbook. The missing reference to Maulana Azad from the Class 11 Political Science textbook (Indian Constitution at Work) is not a part of the current process of rationalisation. The reference was dropped from 2014-15 onwards — and that was finalised for printing in October 2013. Though the reference to Azad was not a part of the current rationalisation process, it ended up being linked with the larger controversy. So many leaders have not been mentioned in textbooks, even earlier.
The major chunk of confusion is caused by the deletion of some items that the critics argued were not included in the notification of the rationalisation. This has nothing to do with some conspiracy but is representative of the regular process of reprinting where minor deletions are not notified to avoid unnecessary confusion. Scrutiny should be lauded as long it is rooted in hard facts and evidence. Selective reading and mischaracterisation do not breed transparency or accountability but undermine them.
Second, the discussions have missed another important point — these textbooks are for this year alone. Besides the larger synchronisation practice of textbooks to make them comply with the NEP 2020, the textbooks are supposed to be revised regularly by the Textbook Development Committee (constituted in 2005). This committee is mandated to develop the syllabus in line with the 2005 National Curriculum Framework (NCF). Each proposed change is first sent to the Textbook Committee, which is tasked to analyse and recommend them. Moreover, these are not radical transformations since reprinting textbooks to take care of the suggestions of stakeholders is a process that takes place every year.
Third, these decisions were taken by the expert panel. The rationalisation of textbooks is a need-based exercise to reduce content load because of the toll taken on the mental health of students during the pandemic. The NCERT arrived at these decisions after consultation with “in-house” domain experts, as well as 25 external specialists.
Changes and revisions in textbooks, and controversies thereafter, are nothing new. In 1978-79, a controversy over revising the contents of history books dominated the political space during the short tenure of Prime Minister Morarji Desai. In 2006, during the UPA rule, a chapter on Sikhism had to be changed because of enormous controversy. Another controversial incident occurred in 2012, when the Shahi Imam of the Fatehpuri Mosque in Delhi, Mohammed Mukarram Ahmed, demanded the removal of two mediaeval paintings from history textbooks arguing that their inclusion violated Sharia law.
However, the speed with which the controversy spread, despite India today being better placed in cross-checking facts than before, is concerning. Context and facts must be accounted for before any discussion is initiated. Learning about the menace of disinformation is an education in itself. The NCERT controversy shows how easy it is to spread misinformation, but more importantly, how necessary it is to counter misinformation.
The writer is Vice Chancellor, Jawaharlal Nehru University
