Politicalization of education

In India or other parts of the world, the politicization of education is nothing new. In fact, even if they are not in power, political participants try to strengthen ideological support through the education system. We all remember how the ruling party at the time made a lot of tones and weeping, even went to the Supreme Court to prevent the 2000 education reform and changed everything when it returned to power in 2004. When they changed the NCF 2000, which was only 4 years old, they said the process was detoxified. Many people who were in an important position at the time were replaced overnight. We all remember some political parties proposed national integration in 1981 through a textbook, and the same efforts we saw in West Bengal in 1989.

Need an urgent need for course updates

In similar cases, we have seen alternative governments seeking to change the curriculum based on their understanding when they come to power in Karnataka, Rajasthan or Madhya Pradesh. It clearly reflects that course changes are not the problem. Here, the question is who is changing the course. 34 years after the 2020 NEP, the last NEP came into effect in 1986, and the last NCF came into effect in 2005. Until the last academic year, all textbooks were followed by NCF-2005, which took effect during UPA-1. With the rapid change of society and knowledge system, curriculum reform is a continuous process and our curriculum is expected to follow suit. It is a privilege for the government to initiate this process by keeping in mind the vision of education and society’s future.

Amritkal celebrations offer opportunities to find and celebrate many unsung heroes. It has talked about and celebrated their contributions. Prior to this, the Chhota Nagpur region and the Northeast region found it very difficult to establish connections with Hindu textbooks. Not only are Hindu textbooks very elite, but they are also in terms of who prepares content. The NEP involves every region of the country and asks and includes their ideas without any bias. As in the NCERT textbook, NEP’s expression and preparation provide platforms for every part of society that are respected by these ideas. These people are early outsiders, so maybe some people do like their inclusion because they don’t have this “privilege” that makes them “qualified” in some ways.

Anger at much-needed reform

The UGC draft is progressive, except for some suggestions we can disagree with, but this is just a draft, they invited the public’s advice. The last major UGC draft change occurred in 2013. There have been some minor changes in 2018 since then, but according to NEP-2020, the 2025 draft UGC attempts to change the higher education system in 2025. Many organizations and individuals have attracted attention and regulators must consider these suggestions, but accusing the head of the NPC parliamentary committee is unprecedented and should not happen. It is classic politicization and dragging educational institutions into political struggles. Instead of mainstream political fronts, a student or teacher-oriented entity should address this issue.

There is no doubt that India is a very diverse country and therefore cannot control education from the center. That’s why we receive education on the same list, but if we check it carefully, the state has a responsibility to improve the quality of education, mainly school education. In the Indian education system, the issue of appointing VCs is nothing new. Our education system has seen many events, namely how the governor appoints the venture capital of his choice. That is our constitution. We have made the governor the prime minister at state universities, which has been practiced for decades, so why are we having problems now? If there is a problem with the provision, a discussion about deleting such provisions when in power should be discussed, not when you object. The problem is that there is a problem with people who have been supporting the idea for decades.

Politicized infrastructure expansion

Now, it is clear that even the expansion of basic infrastructure in education is politicizing. Although course updates have always been a politically sensitive issue, disappointingly, consensus on infrastructure expansion has also been cancelled. PM Shri School is one of the key flagship programs aimed at changing school education, whether it is a central running school or a state aid school; through this program, the government wants to change the school education landscape and hopes to build a model school in the neighborhood, and we all remember how the government brought the model school program through the PPP model in 2012. They target 2500 schools, while the PM Shri program aims at over 14500 schools. The program not only changes the school, but also establishes additional facilities in the school so that students can access world-class facilities. These schools will attract students and break the myth that public schools do not have good facilities.

One of the main initiatives of this government is to open new institutions of higher education in each state; the government opens IIT, Central University, NIT and AIIMS in every state, and sometimes more than one central agency is opened in densely populated states. This hasn’t happened in sixty years. This is a major move that not only demonstrates a desire for young India but also a commitment to the public’s desire for higher education, with NEP-2020 talking about 50% GER in higher education in 2035.

Everyone should stop politicizing education; education is not aimed at any political party, but at society. We must remember that not mobilizing public support, but targeting educational institutions, ultimately undermining their autonomy and reducing their quality. Ultimately, it is the price that citizens must pay for politicization. Due to our large population, we are still struggling to get a quality education and are unable to reach our goal in one day. It’s a long battle and we all should support our future education without political and ideological bias. Political parties must respect institutional autonomy, not undermine it. They can send suggestions and engage through various platforms without breaking it.

End of the article