In the very recent past, Minister for Human Resource Development Prakash Javadekar has made two significant announcements - both not political, but academic. One is the release of a new model curriculum, as designed by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), which would reduce the eligibility credits to pass out as an engineer from 220 to 160.
In the very recent past, Minister for Human Resource Development Prakash Javadekar has made two significant announcements - both not political, but academic. One is the release of a new model curriculum, as designed by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), which would reduce the eligibility credits to pass out as an engineer from 220 to 160. Another is that the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) would reduce by half the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) school syllabus from the academic year 2019.
In both these announcements, two factors are common. One is that there is a conscious aim to reduce or rather cut by half the existing syllabus load, and the other is the justification for doing so - to enable students get time for practical exposure and other activities that would enhance their all-round development.
Both these changes are difficult to be viewed without some trepidation. While there has always been this premise in the Indian education context that more the quantity, better the quality, this proposed change comes as a direct contravention. Also, the syllabus, be it at the school or college level, has always been supplemented year on year in the belief that it was what was best for the student. But after so many years, Indian education has come a full circle and is on the cusp of a change that looks to embrace the belief that less is more.
Two days ago, Mr. Javadekar, in an interview to the state-run Rajya Sabha TV, conceded that the present CBSE syllabus, especially the X and XII, was more than the undergraduate syllabi in colleges and that the workload needed trimming.
He is reported to have said: “The present school syllabus is more than that of BA and B.Com. courses and it needs to be reduced At the stage of development of cognitive skills, students need to be given full freedom. I have asked NCERT to reduce the syllabus by half and it will be effective from the 2019 academic session so that students get time for other activities for their all-round development.”
There are several significant impacts that are attached to the school syllabus getting reduced by half. The first one is the very fact that the CBSE students are being subjected to changes, which come too often, too quick, and are sometime a reversal to the earlier system. For example, while earlier, X and XII students used to write Board (public) exams, this was changed to the Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE) pattern by which a student was evaluated throughout the year and did not have to face an end-of-the-year Board exam.
But this year again, X and XII students are appearing for the Board exam, which they are doing so with not-so-a-clear picture of the whole process. Also, the marking is not based on the CGPA but overall percentage for 500 marks. In this background, in another two years, students, and teachers too, will have to be prepared for another change, in the form of syllabus. With a change almost every year, CBSE teachers feel that their students are being made “guinea pigs” for such experiments of the Government.
Another impact of the reduction in syllabus is in relation to qualifying for the National Eligibility cum entrance Test (NEET) for admission to the MBBS and BDS courses. We are not sure the proposed change in syllabus is going to make more number or reduce the number of students becoming eligible to crack NEET. The very fact that scrapping of NEET is being demanded, in Tamil Nadu, is on the basis that CBSE students have an upper edge as compared to their State Board counterparts.
This is based on the premise (whether right or wrong) that the CBSE syllabus is superior to that of the State Board’s Samacheer pattern. With the Government looking to reduce the syllabus by half, whether this superiority parameter will still hold good is to be seen.
Beyond all this, what makes academics curious is what really does “reduce by half” mean ? If it refers to reduction in content, then will this really make a positive impact on the student and enhance his all-round development ?
In both these announcements, two factors are common. One is that there is a conscious aim to reduce or rather cut by half the existing syllabus load, and the other is the justification for doing so - to enable students get time for practical exposure and other activities that would enhance their all-round development.
Both these changes are difficult to be viewed without some trepidation. While there has always been this premise in the Indian education context that more the quantity, better the quality, this proposed change comes as a direct contravention. Also, the syllabus, be it at the school or college level, has always been supplemented year on year in the belief that it was what was best for the student. But after so many years, Indian education has come a full circle and is on the cusp of a change that looks to embrace the belief that less is more.
Two days ago, Mr. Javadekar, in an interview to the state-run Rajya Sabha TV, conceded that the present CBSE syllabus, especially the X and XII, was more than the undergraduate syllabi in colleges and that the workload needed trimming.
He is reported to have said: “The present school syllabus is more than that of BA and B.Com. courses and it needs to be reduced At the stage of development of cognitive skills, students need to be given full freedom. I have asked NCERT to reduce the syllabus by half and it will be effective from the 2019 academic session so that students get time for other activities for their all-round development.”
There are several significant impacts that are attached to the school syllabus getting reduced by half. The first one is the very fact that the CBSE students are being subjected to changes, which come too often, too quick, and are sometime a reversal to the earlier system. For example, while earlier, X and XII students used to write Board (public) exams, this was changed to the Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE) pattern by which a student was evaluated throughout the year and did not have to face an end-of-the-year Board exam.
But this year again, X and XII students are appearing for the Board exam, which they are doing so with not-so-a-clear picture of the whole process. Also, the marking is not based on the CGPA but overall percentage for 500 marks. In this background, in another two years, students, and teachers too, will have to be prepared for another change, in the form of syllabus. With a change almost every year, CBSE teachers feel that their students are being made “guinea pigs” for such experiments of the Government.
Another impact of the reduction in syllabus is in relation to qualifying for the National Eligibility cum entrance Test (NEET) for admission to the MBBS and BDS courses. We are not sure the proposed change in syllabus is going to make more number or reduce the number of students becoming eligible to crack NEET. The very fact that scrapping of NEET is being demanded, in Tamil Nadu, is on the basis that CBSE students have an upper edge as compared to their State Board counterparts.
This is based on the premise (whether right or wrong) that the CBSE syllabus is superior to that of the State Board’s Samacheer pattern. With the Government looking to reduce the syllabus by half, whether this superiority parameter will still hold good is to be seen.
Beyond all this, what makes academics curious is what really does “reduce by half” mean ? If it refers to reduction in content, then will this really make a positive impact on the student and enhance his all-round development ?