The Delhi government’s Directorate of Education has begun an exercise to slim down school textbooks to free up children’s time for non-academic pursuits. A circular from the directorate states: “It is proposed to reduce the pressure of heavily loaded syllabi of various subjects and provide students with more quality time in school for vocational skills, arts like theatre, music, dance and sports etc. Accordingly, reduction in the existing syllabi of classes VI to X for English, Hindi, Sanskrit, Urdu, Punjabi, Maths, Science and Social Science has been worked out.”
An appendix to the circular contains a table listing the lessons to be deleted for each class and the reasoning behind the choices. The circular, sent to all schools, calls on subject teachers to provide written opinions on the recommended changes.
Since they came to light, political motivations of all sorts are being read into the recommendations, particularly those for classes IX and X that would require the acquiescence of Central Board of Secondary Education to push through. Some of this reading has no basis at all.
Weeding out repetitions
For example, the deletion of a chapter from Anne Frank’s Diary in one of the class IX English readers and of the novel Gulliver’s Travels from the class IX and X English syllabi are being interpreted as political discomfort with the author or characters’ relationship to authority. But, the reasons for deleting the chapter from Anne Frank: The Diary of A Young Girl, are perfectly legitimate. The book is one of the two options for long-reads for class X, and the students’ favourite, so it makes no sense to have a chapter in the reader for class IX.
As for Gulliver’s Travels, even the most committed and thoughtful teachers of English in the Delhi government school system were baffled at its inclusion (along with Three Men in a Boat) in the syllabus. Both books are on the CBSE’s list of long-reads, the purpose of which is to promote a reading habit. A teacher, with 20 years experience teaching in Delhi government schools, said that Gulliver’s Travels and Three Men in a Boat have the opposite effect on 15 and 16 year olds who today are not big readers in any case.
Another English teacher, familiar with how the books were picked by the CBSE that Delhi government schools are affiliated to, says that schoolchildren and the development of their reading habits were not uppermost in the minds of the decision makers when the choice of books was made. They chose the books because they were no longer under copyright and so could be printed on the cheap and made available online.
The proposed deletions from Social Studies textbooks, particularly the civics books, have raised a mini storm, not least because the deletions include the chapters which lead to an understanding of democracy, power sharing and people’s participation. What adds more interest to this story is that Yogendra Yadav was one of the two chief advisers for these textbooks. A current vice-principal of a government school and a former civics teacher said the chapters recommended for deletion were the ones that students had no problem relating to. Delhi state and its relationship with the Centre made the inter-linked chapters on power sharing and federalism easy to teach. Yet, the directorate recommended their deletion because “lesson contains examples from different parts of the world after reading this lesson students feel that participatory governance is a complete failure in India, which is not true” and “it seems that lesson enumerates only the shortcomings in the Indian federalism.”
Mindless recommendations
What made this teacher laugh was the deletion of a chapter on social movements. He said that students in Delhi’s government schools had experienced at first hand a popular movement against arbitrary electricity pricing, as well as a movement against corruption that gave rise to the ruling Aam Admi Party. Yet, the directorate in its wisdom has recommended the deletion of the chapter on social movements saying, “After reading this lesson students feel that agitation, anarchy and going against the government are the only means of securing social justice. This is not true in a democracy.” This reasoning seems to echo the critics of the Aam Admi Party’s style of mass politics.
The vice-principal believes that these are mindless recommendations that have come through a process that is “a bureaucratic exercise rather than an academic exercise”. “They have been told they have to delete some chapters,” he said, “so without thinking too much they have made a list and provided some reasons.” “They” are the groups formed to make the recommendations for each class and book, and are usually composed of a government school principal, a couple of subject teachers and an official from the directorate. The choice of people is based on the directorate’s familiarity with them and not on any special academic capacity.
The groups’ recommendations do not follow a process of consultation with schools, teachers and students – they follow instructions from on high. The consultation, such as it is, is only on the recommendations they have made and opinions from schools and schoolteachers have to be “in not more than 150 words for each class”.
This is not a story about political malfeasance or ideological control, it’s about business as usual – unimaginative, bureaucratic and unconcerned about the people. The people in the story are schoolchildren.
We welcome your comments at
letters@scroll.in.
An appendix to the circular contains a table listing the lessons to be deleted for each class and the reasoning behind the choices. The circular, sent to all schools, calls on subject teachers to provide written opinions on the recommended changes.
Since they came to light, political motivations of all sorts are being read into the recommendations, particularly those for classes IX and X that would require the acquiescence of Central Board of Secondary Education to push through. Some of this reading has no basis at all.
Weeding out repetitions
For example, the deletion of a chapter from Anne Frank’s Diary in one of the class IX English readers and of the novel Gulliver’s Travels from the class IX and X English syllabi are being interpreted as political discomfort with the author or characters’ relationship to authority. But, the reasons for deleting the chapter from Anne Frank: The Diary of A Young Girl, are perfectly legitimate. The book is one of the two options for long-reads for class X, and the students’ favourite, so it makes no sense to have a chapter in the reader for class IX.
As for Gulliver’s Travels, even the most committed and thoughtful teachers of English in the Delhi government school system were baffled at its inclusion (along with Three Men in a Boat) in the syllabus. Both books are on the CBSE’s list of long-reads, the purpose of which is to promote a reading habit. A teacher, with 20 years experience teaching in Delhi government schools, said that Gulliver’s Travels and Three Men in a Boat have the opposite effect on 15 and 16 year olds who today are not big readers in any case.
Another English teacher, familiar with how the books were picked by the CBSE that Delhi government schools are affiliated to, says that schoolchildren and the development of their reading habits were not uppermost in the minds of the decision makers when the choice of books was made. They chose the books because they were no longer under copyright and so could be printed on the cheap and made available online.
The proposed deletions from Social Studies textbooks, particularly the civics books, have raised a mini storm, not least because the deletions include the chapters which lead to an understanding of democracy, power sharing and people’s participation. What adds more interest to this story is that Yogendra Yadav was one of the two chief advisers for these textbooks. A current vice-principal of a government school and a former civics teacher said the chapters recommended for deletion were the ones that students had no problem relating to. Delhi state and its relationship with the Centre made the inter-linked chapters on power sharing and federalism easy to teach. Yet, the directorate recommended their deletion because “lesson contains examples from different parts of the world after reading this lesson students feel that participatory governance is a complete failure in India, which is not true” and “it seems that lesson enumerates only the shortcomings in the Indian federalism.”
Mindless recommendations
What made this teacher laugh was the deletion of a chapter on social movements. He said that students in Delhi’s government schools had experienced at first hand a popular movement against arbitrary electricity pricing, as well as a movement against corruption that gave rise to the ruling Aam Admi Party. Yet, the directorate in its wisdom has recommended the deletion of the chapter on social movements saying, “After reading this lesson students feel that agitation, anarchy and going against the government are the only means of securing social justice. This is not true in a democracy.” This reasoning seems to echo the critics of the Aam Admi Party’s style of mass politics.
The vice-principal believes that these are mindless recommendations that have come through a process that is “a bureaucratic exercise rather than an academic exercise”. “They have been told they have to delete some chapters,” he said, “so without thinking too much they have made a list and provided some reasons.” “They” are the groups formed to make the recommendations for each class and book, and are usually composed of a government school principal, a couple of subject teachers and an official from the directorate. The choice of people is based on the directorate’s familiarity with them and not on any special academic capacity.
The groups’ recommendations do not follow a process of consultation with schools, teachers and students – they follow instructions from on high. The consultation, such as it is, is only on the recommendations they have made and opinions from schools and schoolteachers have to be “in not more than 150 words for each class”.
This is not a story about political malfeasance or ideological control, it’s about business as usual – unimaginative, bureaucratic and unconcerned about the people. The people in the story are schoolchildren.
