top of page

By:

Correspondent

23 August 2024 at 4:29:04 pm

Trust Reset

As the recent protests over the NEET paper leak showed, India’s examination system has reached a point where incremental repairs are no longer enough. The appointment of a high-powered task force on examination reforms, headed by technology pioneer Nandan Nilekani, is therefore not merely an administrative response to the NEET-UG paper leak crisis but a concrete attempt to rebuild confidence in one of the country’s most important public institutions. Examinations are gateways to opportunity,...

Trust Reset

As the recent protests over the NEET paper leak showed, India’s examination system has reached a point where incremental repairs are no longer enough. The appointment of a high-powered task force on examination reforms, headed by technology pioneer Nandan Nilekani, is therefore not merely an administrative response to the NEET-UG paper leak crisis but a concrete attempt to rebuild confidence in one of the country’s most important public institutions. Examinations are gateways to opportunity, social mobility and professional ambition. For millions of students across the country, a competitive examination represents years of sacrifice by families and the possibility of a better future. When question papers leak repeatedly, evaluation systems fail or allegations of manipulation emerge, the resulting damage strikes at the idea of fairness itself. The crisis surrounding NEET-UG exposed uncomfortable vulnerabilities in the country’s examination infrastructure. The resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan and the subsequent appointment of Pralhad Joshi with additional charge of the ministry underlined the political seriousness of the issue. But political accountability alone cannot fix a structural problem. That is why the composition of the new task force is a move on the right direction. It brings together expertise from technology, space research, intelligence, education administration and logistics. Nilekani’s appointment is particularly significant. The former Infosys chief executive and architect of Aadhaar has experience in building large-scale digital public infrastructure involving hundreds of millions of citizens. The Aadhaar project itself was born out of a similar challenge: how to create a reliable identity system in a country where leakages and duplication weakened welfare delivery. India’s examination system now requires the same kind of thinking. The committee’s mandate to examine the entire examination lifecycle - from question paper creation and distribution to candidate verification, evaluation and results - is the right approach. The problem lies in multiple weak points where human intervention, poor security protocols and outdated processes can create opportunities for malpractice. Technology will inevitably be central to the solution. Artificial intelligence can help detect unusual patterns, blockchain-based verification can strengthen record security and better data systems can improve transparency. But a secure examination system requires independent oversight, professional management, clear accountability and swift punishment for wrongdoing. India’s National Testing Agency was created to bring efficiency and standardisation to public examinations. Its credibility must now be restored through reforms that are visible and trusted by students. The Nilekani task force has been given the difficult job of repairing that trust. The government has chosen a committee led by people with experience of managing complex national systems. It is a sensible first step. The real test will now be whether its recommendations translate into action.

Lingua Pragmatica

Updated: Mar 20, 2025

As Southern leaders like M.K. Stalin rage against Hindi, Andhra Pradesh’s Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu offers a model of pragmatism over parochialism.

Chandrababu Naidu
Andhra Pradesh

Amid the cacophony of opposition in southern states to Hindi, Andhra Pradesh CM N. Chandrababu Naidu has taken a markedly pragmatic stance by remarking recently in the state Assembly that there was no harm in learning other languages. Hindi, Naidu noted, was useful for communication across India, particularly in political and commercial hubs like Delhi. His remarks, though avoiding explicit mention of the NEP, were widely seen as an endorsement of multilingualism and a rebuke to the linguistic chauvinism that has gripped parts of the South.


Few issues in India stir political passions quite like language. It is not merely a means of communication but a marker of identity, a relic of colonial resistance, and a source of political mobilization. In the southern states, where anti-Hindi sentiment has long been entrenched, the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and its three-language formula have reignited old tensions. No state embodies this defiance more than Tamil Nadu, where the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) led by M.K. Stalin has framed the policy as an assault on its linguistic autonomy.


Naidu’s words, welcomed by his ally and Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan, mark a sharp contrast with the DMK’s position. Tamil Nadu’s hostility towards Hindi dates back to the 1930s, when C. Rajagopalachari’s attempt to introduce it in schools met with fierce resistance. The anti-Hindi agitations of the 1960s cemented the DMK’s ideological stance, with its first Chief Minister, C.N. Annadurai, famously warning that Hindi imposition could push Tamil Nadu towards secession.


The question, however, is whether this rigid opposition serves Tamil Nadu’s interests. While Stalin, with an eye to the upcoming Tamil Nadu Assembly polls, has been relentlessly portraying Hindi as a threat to his state’s regional identity, Naidu, a partner of the BJP-led Centre, is framing it as a tool for economic mobility. His argument is not that Hindi should replace Telugu or English but that it offers a competitive advantage.


The economic case for multilingualism is compelling. Indians who speak multiple languages tend to have better job prospects, higher earnings and greater geographic mobility. Andhra Pradesh’s Telugu-speaking diaspora is a case in point. Telugus make up a significant proportion of Indian-origin professionals in the United States, the Gulf, and Southeast Asia as Naidu pointed out, hinting that this success story was built not on linguistic rigidity but on adaptability.


In a country where inter-state migration is rising and where Hindi remains the most widely spoken language, refusing to learn it amounts to self-imposed isolation. Tamil Nadu’s approach, by contrast, risks limiting its youth. The DMK government has refused to implement the three-language policy, keeping schools strictly bilingual with Tamil and English. Its justification that Hindi is not necessary for global success could be true in a narrow sense but ignores the domestic context. If Tamil filmmakers can dub their movies into Hindi to expand their audience, why should Tamil students be denied access to the language that could open more doors for them within India?


The DMK has accused successive central governments, particularly under the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), of pushing Hindi at the expense of regional languages. Yet, rejecting Hindi outright is an overcorrection. The reality is that Hindi is an important language in India’s economic and political landscape. Naidu’s position, one of accommodation rather than confrontation, offers a middle ground that other Southern leaders would do well to consider.


Some states already recognize this. Karnataka, despite its own history of linguistic pride, has allowed Hindi to be taught as an optional language. Kerala, whose migrants work in Hindi-speaking regions and the Gulf, has been less hostile to Hindi education. Naidu’s model, balancing regional identity with practical necessity, offers a way forward. Languages should be embraced, not politicized. Southern leaders would do well to listen to him.

Comments

bottom of page