Against the saffronisation of education, voices of protests have been raised and the mainstream media have overlooked these. In fact the dominant, mainstream media has not really analysed the deletions and their impact beyond parroting the establishment’s position.

However, Professor Suhas Palshikar and Professor Yogendra Yadav, the chief advisors of the political science book, sent a letter to the NCERT director and called the changes “arbitrary” acts. After Yadav shared the letter on his Twitter handle on Friday, it drew the attention of a few media houses.

In their letter, they alleged the NCERT authority of “mutilating” textbooks “beyond recognition” and blamed the authority for acting in a “partisan manner”. They were right to argue that such an act by NCERT killed “the spirit of critique and questioning”.

Lodging their strong protest, they have dissociated themselves from the textbooks. Under the supervision of Palshikar and Yadav, political science books for high schools and intermediate levels were prepared in 2006-2007. Suhas Palshikar’s interview to Max Maharashtra explains this process.

While the books have not been “replaced” by the current regime, a large share of the previous contents are now deleted. The fact that the significant changes were made without even consulting the chief advisors is a pointer to the political agenda of Hindutva forces.

It appears that the erasure is a part of the well-thought s t r a t e g y. The Hindutva game has been able to remove almost all those contents that have long challenged their communal politics. Such deletion is justified in the name of “rationalization of syllabus”.

In the name of “reducing” curriculum burden to help students achieve “speedy recovery” post-Corona pandemic, the real agenda is to hollow out the textbooks from their progressive contents and to deny the young mind the right to know the ugly face of communalism.

Look at the irony. The Modi Government has not introduced any new textbooks, yet their intellectual sharpness has been blunted.

The tinkered textbooks and changed syllabus appear to be alive, yet they seem dead in their effect. These textbooks have bodies, yet they have been reduced to soul-less beings. Remember that the process of deleting the contents began a couple of years ago.

2020 deletions: NCERT 

During the outbreak of the Corona (Covid-19) pandemic in 2020, the media reported that the chapters on secularism, citizenship, nationalism and federalism from NCERT political science books were deleted. Wasn’t it a shameful act? While the world was fighting the pandemic, the Modi Government was searching for an “opportunity in crisis”.

During those critical days, not only the chapters of textbooks were removed but this was akso accompanied by some policy moves: anti-people farm laws were imposed on the country. From the tampering with NCERT textbooks to enacting anti-labour laws and holding the ground-laying ceremony of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, the Modi Government has been occupied with fulfilling Sangh’s (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh-RSS) agenda.

In the more recent past, this process of mutilation of textbooks has been rapid. Selected contents dealing with Mughal history, Freedom Struggle(s), social movements, democracy, communalism, regional identity and marginalised groups, have been deleted.

The chapters discussing Mughal courts have also been torn off. Lines about Mahatma Gandhi have shamelessly been erased and the name of Maulana Azad, freedom fighter and the first education minister of Independent India, has been dropped without giving any reason.

The long list of deleted items continues:

• A few lines from the political science book that discusses the 2002 Gujarat Violence have been deleted; similarly,
• Content on the report by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) on Gujarat 2002 as well
• Then prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s call to the Gujarat government to follow “raj dharma” without discriminating people based on caste and religion, have been removed;
• The reference to Gandhi being disliked by Hindu extremists and the identity of his assassin Nathuram Godse as a Brahmin have been erased as well.
• Even the references to ghettoisation as a result of anti-Muslim Gujarat violence have been deleted from NCERT sociology books; the chapters on the Mughal Court, Central Islamic Lands, the Cold War, and the era of one party dominance discussing the early phase of the Congress party have been torn off.

While the themes of the deleted contents and disciplines may vary, the unifying thread running through all of them is that these contents have brought to the students the complexities of Indian politics and histories and challenged the narrow Hindutva narrative.

Communal forces are fully aware that they can only protect the interest of the elites if they can peddle “their” narration as the “truth”. By capturing educational institutions, these saffron forces have been relentlessly working to replace secular ideas and the egalitarian values of the Constitution with their partisan ideology based on supremacy of historically dominant castes.

Though, the main targets of the supremacist forces appear to be only Muslims, this is not the complete picture. The RSS are not against Muslims alone but against the majority of Indians who are Dalits, Adivasis, backwards, women, and minorities and the poor among the upper castes.

While their direct assault appears to be on Indian Muslims, they are also busy erasing the emancipatory histories of other marginalised communities. While the chapters on Mughals were being removed, the Hindutva forces deliberately projected the deletion as an act of “nationalising” history and “removing” contents of the “foreign aggressors” from the curriculum.

At the same time as Mughal history was erased, however, what was not made public was the fact that a powerful poem that inspires the Dalit Movement, was also removed from the political science book and contents dealing with Sikh history have been removed as well.

Similarly, when a chapter on poet-philosopher Allama Iqbal was removed from the BA Political Science syllabus of Delhi University, the tinkering on a course on Ambedkar was also planned (and implemented) at the same time.

Something else is happening besides this erasure. While the histories of the marginalized communities are being deleted, Hindutva ideologues are also being promoted as “national icons”.

For example, the University of Delhi recently passed a proposal to teach a full course on Hindutva ideology V. D. Savarkar, the person who tendered an apology to the British Raj and divided Indians on religious lines during the Freedom Struggle!  Savarkar is likely to be taught ahead of the courses on Gandhi and Ambedkar. These developments are a pointer to the fact that Hindutva forces are not just against minorities but also against the vast section of Indians, diverse and dynamic, especially all marginalised sections.

That is why the battle has to be waged by forging a unity of the oppressed.

 Long back philosophers have cautioned that while constructing the past, historians must confront complexities and resist constructing a sanitized version of historical truth.

The Hindutva agendas is the polar opposite of this. Instead of attempting an understanding of the multiple and complex histories of India, saffron forces are desperate to establish only their one truth, by erasing all others. Their conception of India is Brahmanical and narrow, which goes against the spirit of the Constitution and the interests of the majority of Indians, i.e., Dalits, Backwards, Adivasis, women, minorities and Dravidians.

The mutilation of the textbooks should be a big concern for the nation. Such an act attempts to deny young minds the right to know the truth. Critical thinking is being denied and the young minds are injected with the narrative promoting contempt for marginalized communities and minorities.

Such an act also goes against pluralism and communal harmony and it tries to identify India with one culture and one religion. It is high time we waged a unified struggle against the saffronisation of education.

(Dr Abhay Kumar is a Delhi-based journalist. He has taught political science at the NCWEB Centre of Delhi University.)

Related:

Now NCERT removes passages about caste and religious discrimination from social science books

Decimating schools to accommodate Shakhas

Our protest, why we want our names removed from NCERT textbooks: Suhas Palshikar

The post Peddling a coloured narrative: NCERT Textbooks appeared first on SabrangIndia.

When the new National Curriculum Framework (National Curriculum Framework) was adopted in 2005, NCERT invited experts from different disciplines as Chief Advisors to prepare a new textbook according to that framework. NCERT communicated to these advisors that the new course should be outlined in consultation with colleagues from all over the country. Through this process, a text book was to be designed (formulated) in the next year (2006).

At the time Civics was a subject in schools and Politics or Political Science was a subject for higher secondary i.e. Standards XI and XII. I taught both these subjects as professor at Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune. Yogendra Yadav, a professor at CSDS, Delhi, was called in as chief advisor.

The first decision taken by us was to fix this subject called Civics. This is a category handed down from the British colonial period and hence the subject was taught within social sciences under the name of “politics” from Standards IX to X.

We invited almost 50 professors from the schools across the country, divided them into different groups and (based on consultations) prepared a new Rajya Shastra book, one for class IX, one for class XI and two for class XII. Later it was translated into Hindi and other languages. This book came into existence in 2006 and 2007. This is the background to the controversy that has now arisen with which we are concerned.

What has happened now begins at start of last year. NCERT announced that now since the times of Covid-19 pandemic (and its fallout) we will remove some burden from study so that there it eases study for the children. Following this decision, that many parts were gradually removed, sometimes announced and sometimes unannounced. Now this year, 2023, this process was given a new name. In English, we were told that “we” (NCERT) are “rationalising” studies and books. What this means is that NCERT is removing “any extra useless or inappropriate content from the book.”

In doing so, they removed the very foundational link between democracy and diversity. Federalism vanished. Not only this, but the period of the Emergency, which the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government has itself has been constantly talking about, was also removed. And of course, while doing all this, the parts that mentioned the Gujarat (2002) riots were removed. Not only this, some parts of sentences, for example, one sentence about Khalistan was retained and the other was removed. There were also changes in the methodology.

People’s Movements Social Movements are covered by a separate chapter in the book for Standard XII. And remember, students of class XII are voters. Now, keeping that in mind, what did NCERT do? They prepared for the student, a serial book covering sixty years of the Indian political history but –critically–entire Indian politics, but removed the chapter on social movements from it. News of such changes was received in the public domain but at no stage were the advisors or experts or teachers originally consulted, even told about these changes. We did not expect them to.

But basically what we are now saying is that now these books have been changed beyond recognition. That is, the books we created (2006) and the books that have now been cut and pruned (with chapters removed and passed down to children) are two entirely different things. Whenever we create a series of books, these books have an nternal logic. That logic no longer exists. Children are no longer expected to ask questions themselves. And so we have asked NCERT not to put our name on these books as Chief Advisors on the printed books anymore.

On this issue, some people have asked why don’t you resign? It is not a question of resignation, because we have been freed from our responsibilities in the past. And resigned. But until new books are produced, the authors and editors of old books remain. That’s how our name on the “Text Book Development Team” kept appearing on the opening pages for years.

Now what we mean is that the textbook we developed is not what the present textbook is. Now if NCERT wants to keep this text book then they should write the name of experts they want to credit (for the new version) but we have nothing to do with these books.

In a sense this is our protest, in a sense it is also our important philosophical role in the educational context. And so in the context of these books, just like in the science book, for example, the subject of evolution in science is removed. It has happened in the history text that any mention of Mughals has been removed.

Background

On June 9, in an open letter to the Director, NCERT, stating they were “Embarrassed” with the NCERT textbooks, Suhas Palshikar, Yogendra Yadav asked NCERT to drop their names. Following recent controversial changes made to political science textbooks, the political scientists wrote to NCERT asking it to drop their names as chief advisors. We feel embarrassed that our names should be mentioned as chief advisors to these mutilated and academically dysfunctional textbooks,” they said.

The letter was written jointly by Suhas Palshikar and Yogendra Yadav since they have been advisors for political science textbooks for the central body. They released their letter in light of disagreements with controversial changes that the education council recently made to many of its textbooks. “We were never consulted or even informed of these changes … The frequent and serial deletions do not seem to have any logic except to please the powers that be,” Palshikar and Yadav said in their letter to the NCERT director. Prof. Suhas Palshikar and I have dissociated ourselves from the six NCERT textbooks that we had the honour to put together but that have now been mutilated beyond recognition. We have asked NCERT to remove our names from these books.

While for the regime, the modifications have been justified on the grounds of ‘rationalisation’, we fail to see any pedagogical rationale at work here. We find that the text has been mutilated beyond recognition,” the letter also reads.

Among the changes the NCERT made to its political science textbooks earlier this year are removing references to the 2002 Gujarat communal violence  from its Class 12 book, chapters titled ‘Democracy and Diversity’, ‘Popular Struggles and Movements’ and ‘Challenges of Democracy’ from its Class 10 book and a section on sedition from its Class 8 book. The NCERT has also removed chapters relating to Mughal history from a Class 12 history textbook, and last year it also summarily deleted chapter on Darwin’s theory of evolution from its Class 10 biology textbook.It justified its decisions as part of a ‘rationalisation’ exercise designed to “reduce the content load” on students following the COVID-19 pandemic.

Related:

https://sabrangindia.in/embarrassed-with-textbooks-suhas-palshikar-yogendra-yadav-ask-ncert-to-drop-their-names/

The post Our protest, why we want our names removed from NCERT textbooks: Suhas Palshikar appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Photo credit: Indian Express

Recently, the Yogi Adityanath government in Uttar Pradesh announced that henceforth madrasa students would study NCERT textbooks instead of their regular run of the mill curriculum. Also, sometime back, one of its ministers stated that madrasas should impact the study of science and mathematics instead of teaching them subjects which are irrelevant in the present age and time.

How should we look at these announcements which ostensibly could lead madrasas on the path of modernization? Yogi’s government, through its actions and polemics, has not been very kind to the Muslims. In fact, he comes from a party which refused to give even a single ticket to Muslim candidates in Assembly elections. The needless controversy over the Taj Mahal created by BJP and left unresolved by the chief minister is still fresh. Understandably then, Muslims will have suspicion about the Uttar Pradesh government’s intention behind introducing NCERT textbooks in madrasas. It is entirely possible that the motive behind such a move is to generate fresh controversy. But can we also see this as an opportunity to discuss and debate what is rotting within our madrasa system?

It is common knowledge that the present state of madrasas leaves much to be desired. The education imparted in these seminaries is outmoded and medieval; there are books of logic (Mantiq) on which students spend hours but hardly get anything out of it. Of course, there was a time when madrasas were able to produce not just master theologians but also some of the finest philosophers, mathematicians and even architects. But after 1857, madrasas transformed themselves into exclusive centres of religious learning. The new Dars e Nizami syllabus initiated by Deoband and subsequently followed by all madrasas in South Asia, concentrated solely on the study of Quran and Hadis.

Post-independence, some states organized madrasas through various state madrasa Boards and tried to rectify the situation by introducing modern subjects. But there were others, what are called azad madrasas, whose numbers are much more as compared to the state controlled madrasas, but who still continue to teach a moribund and irrelevant curriculum to this day. While the state Board madrasas struggle with lack of qualified teachers, the azad madrasas perhaps need to overhaul their whole syllabus to make it relevant to the needs of the present times.

The Sachar Committee report and even before that the Gopal Singh Commission Report of 1986, have reminded us time and again that Muslims are an educational backward minority. The current educational data suggests that the problem of Muslim educational deficit starts at the primary stage itself where schools are unable to retain Muslim students due to high drop-out rate. This has some linkage with madrasas. In states like Uttar Pradesh for example, madrasas run parallel to the school system. Thus a child going to a madrasa will never be able to simultaneously experience the joys of schooling. Wouldn’t it be better if madrasa timings were adjusted in such a way that a Muslim child is able to simultaneously access both? This simple step will help improve the retention levels of Muslim children in schools.

The curriculum needs to change to reflect the changing needs of society. After all, what is the use of such an Alim, who does not know anything about modern history, politics or even geography? Even if the Alim wants to preach about Islam, he has to do it in this world and must have at least some knowledge of how the world operates today. Otherwise, we can only expect the likes of Ulema who masquerade as knowledgeable people only in television studios. Muslim community must realise that today’s madrasa system is doing a great disservice to their aspirations. There is a need to modernize these madrasas and introduce the study of modern subjects in them. We cannot have a situation where a Muslim religious leader is not aware of what is happening in the wider world. After all, if he is to provide service to religion, then it has to be done in this world itself. Therefore, understanding the world in all its complexities should be the primary concern of all education, including Islamic education.

It is also equally important to realise that lakhs of children are studying in these madrasas and the present state of affairs does not equip them to even understand the location of different countries on the world map. In the name of protecting of our tradition, are we not sacrificing the future of these Muslim children? Yogi Adityanath may be doing this for political reasons, but why should we blindly oppose the introduction of a superior quality of textbooks in our madrasas?

The rot within the madrasa system runs deep. Merely introducing modern textbooks is not going to stem the rot. After all, what are the madrasas going to do with these textbooks when there are hardly any teachers to teach them? A survey conducted by Hamdard Education Society found out that there were hardly any trained teachers in madrasas. What was pitiable was that in scores of madrasas, teachers who were teaching science and mathematics were not even qualified to teach these subjects. Moreover, only very few madrasas have availed the benefits of modernization of madrasa scheme and even their subjects have been added haphazardly to the curriculum.

 The average madrasa student is already overburdened by the religious syllabus. Just going on adding modern subjects will only increase such a burden. Thus there needs to be a design as how we need to introduce these subjects and if possible how can we reduce the content of the religious curriculum. Without such open discussion about madrasas, nothing is going to become better. Muslim leaders must understand that neither the Congress, nor the Left or the BJP has done much for them. It is up to the Muslims therefore that they should seize all opportunity which has the potential for betterment of Muslim society. 

Arshad Alam is a columnist with www.NewAgeIslam.com

Republished with permission of New Age Islam.

The post Muslims Must Seize Every Opportunity to Reform Their Madrasas appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The new NCERT syllabus is a brazen reflection of the sectarian agenda of the BJP-led NDA regime and has been announced despite widespread protests against the moves to doctor education in social studies and history

Undeterred by the countrywide criticism on the New Curricuilum Framework for Value Education, a criticism that has pointed out over a whole year of heated debate – that education ministers of states were not consulted before the syllabus was framed (CC, Jan01), that CABE concurrence was not obtained, that Parliament was bypassed – the NCERT went ahead and published it’s new syllabus in late January 02.

Two months earlier, in November 01, textbooks authored by eminent historians, Romila Thapar, R.S. Sharma and Satish Chandra had been subject to the saffron sledgehammer and politically inconvenient paragraphs were summarily deleted.

SAHMAT, one of the organisations that has been at the forefront of the mobilisation against these developments challenged the new syllabus through written analyses proferred by eminent historian Irfan Habib.

The yearlong and countrywide protests have drawn in a wide section of Indian academia and social activists. Within Parliament, a handful of thinking Parliamentarians had launched the cross-party Parliamentary Forum of Education and Culture (see CC, May 01). Khoj –education for a Plural India and Communalism Combat had intitiated a debate on the New Curricular Framework as early as January 01, through a letter addressed by independent Member of Parliament, Shabana Azmi. Azmi’s letter to the chief ministers and education ministers of all states accompanied by a detailed note that explained the implications of the new thrust in education policy, urged them to call for an Education Minister’s Conference.

The movement against these developments received a fillip when SAHMAT organised a national convention against the communalisation of education, drawing in nine education ministers to oppose these developments in the beginning of August 01.

Regardless of the depths of these protests, the NCERT, under hard-liner, union HRD minister, Murli Manohar Joshi, has carried on with the proposal to limit and doctor the vision that drives Indian education especially in the area of social studies. New NCERT textbooks written by persons whose names the NCERT refuses to divulge are also expected out in March this year.

A detailed note prepared by eminent historians was released by SAHMAT in New Delhi on January 31, 02. Stung by the opposition, NCERT’s director J.S. Rajput resorted to mudslinging, questioning the ‘willful misrepresentation’ by SAHMAT, to which the organisation has promptly replied. Meanwhile, in a seemingly unrelated development, SAHMAT was evicted from its small premises at VP Bhavan, a space that it has occupied for over a dozen years.

According to the analysis collated by SAHMAT, there are some Specific Errors, Omissions, Comments on the Content Outline in History-Related ‘Themes’ . These include:

Class VI: People and Society in the Ancient period

• Vedic culture has been made a part of the Bronze Age along with Harappan and Egyptian, Mesopotamian and Chinese civilisations.
• Iron Age’s relevance only to the Megalithic culture of Deccan and South India
• No reference to the early South Indian Kingdoms (Cheras, Cholas,Pandyas) and, more importantly, even to the Satavahanas and Indo-Greeks, Sakas, Kushans, Parthians, etc and their contribution to developments during the period 200 BC–AD 300 supposedly covered by the words ‘Central Asians’.
• ‘Contributions of India to world civilization’ until before 6th Century BC.
• Projects activities–Konarak, Lingaraja temple, Nataraja at Chidambaram-nothing to do with the period covered in this course.

Class VII : People and Society in the Medieval Period

• Cholas and Delhi Sultanate along with some others as small kingdoms-Pallavas whose power ended in the 9th century are here as well as in class VI-Turkish rule and Delhi Sultanate as different entities.-The idea of ‘resistance’ introduced here; No art, culture, etc. for this period ( up to about early 16th century)
• Mughal empire and rise of small states and assertion of independence clubbed together– ‘Assertion of independence’ by Sikhs, Marathas and Rajputs

Class VIII: People and Society in the Modern period

• World scenario in the Modern period ends with European conquest of Asia and Africa while Indian developments conclude with independence.
• American and French Revolutions and German and Italian unification placed after Indian independence.
• Because the world scenario ends with the 19th century, Russian Revolution, the two world wars, etc. are not a part of ‘People and society in the Modern Period’.
• The Moderates and Extremists referred as Petitioners and Radicals, ‘division of Bengal’ but no reference to anti-partition movement; 1942 movement-the only mass movement referred to.

Class IX : India in the Twentieth century world

• The 20th Century world presented here covering the period from colonialism to Peace Treaties ( after World War I),
• ‘Towards to New World’ comprising, among others, ‘Development of fascism and nazism and ‘World After 1945’ in which ‘use of Atom Bomb’ comes after UN Charter and Cold War.
• ‘India in the Twentieth Century world’ begins, besides some other topics, with the uprising of 1857.

ClassX : The only history-related topic is ‘ Heritage: Natural and Cultural’.

Classes XI: XII : ( History as an ElectiveSubject)

Semester I : Ancient India

• Unit 1: The relevance of sub-topics relating to tradition and traditional history here will depend on how they are treated in the textbooks. The notion of ‘Eternal India’ introduced here may be unhistorical obfuscation.
• Unit 3: On the Harappan civilization refers to its ‘Vedic Connection’ which may be unhistorical.
• Unit 4: is entitled Vedic Culture. The period which this unit is supposed to cover is not clearly stated though the period third to first Millenium BC is mentioned with reference to ‘Mathematics and Science’. Does the Vedic period begin in the third millenium BC The way some sub-topics are worded e.g. ‘Spiritual and religious traditions of the Vedic India’, ‘India as described in Vedic literature’, ‘The antiquity of Vedas and Vedic people’ and various others is meant to project a mythical view. Is the germination high philosophy (unit 6) post-Vedic and does the spiritual and philosophical thought of ancient India consist of Upanishads, Brahmanas and Sutras only and India’s only contribution to the philosophical thought of the world?
• Unit 9: refers to Chanakya’s efforts for geographical and political unity as well as to Maurya attempts at political unity of India. In unit 12, Guptas attempts to unite India. No such attempt is attributed to the Sultans and even to the Mughals in the syllabus outline for medieval India.
• No political unit of the Deccan and South, except the Rashtrakutas .is mentioned—not even the Satavahanas, the Pallavas, the Chalukyas, not to speak of the early Cholas, Cheras and Pandyas.
• There is no reference to the Varna system in the period before 300 BC. The only reference to caste occurs in unit 11 which deals with ‘Social life as reflected in contemporary literature from 200 BC to 300 AD.
• Numerous units refer to India’s influence on world civilisation in general and some specific regions but none whatsoever of other cultures’ influences India.

Semester II: Medieval India
The content outline of this period of Indian history reflects the total incompetence and appalling historical ignorance of those who have drafted it and is a reflection on the credentials of the academic body which has published it. The denigration of the Sultanate of Delhi and the Mughal empire is clearly meant to ensure that students do not develop any understanding of the place of this period in the country’s history in the growth of India’s composite culture.

• The syllabus for the period is organised in the form of three units. Unit II which is entitled ‘ The Rise of Ghaznavis’ begins with the first Turkish (Ghaznavid) invasions and covers the history of the Sultanate which had nothing to do with the Ghaznavis (sic) (who had been supplanted much before the end of the 12th century) and some of its successor states. The period covered, though nowhere stated, may be, for some parts of India, up to the 15th century.
• This unit is followed by the third and the last unit in medieval Indian history which is, oddly given the title ‘ The political Conditions’. Though again the specific period this unit is supposed to cover is not stated, a number of dynasties that it refers to such as the Cholas, had arisen in the 10th century and most of them had ceased to exist before the disintegration of the Delhi Sultanate.
• It also perfunctorily refers to the Mughal Empire but, of course, not to the political unification brought about by them. The unit also introduces the concept of ‘ resistance’ in the context of Mughal Empire. There is not even a reference to the Bhakti and Sufi movements or to the birth of Sikhism.
• There was a reference in the media some months ago to the suspicion that the NCERT is going to more or less do away with the Delhi Sultanate and the Mughal empire. The present syllabus tends to confirm that suspicion. 

Archived from Communalism Combat, January-February 2002 Year 8  No. 75-76, Debate

The post NCERT Syllabus: Joshi’s Shastras appeared first on SabrangIndia.