Impact of the Controversial Changes in NCERT Textbooks | Tamanna Yadav

Parents and students can review the new textbooks featuring these gender-neutral images on the official Kerala General Education Department website. The textbooks are part of the curriculum for various grades, with specific emphasis on Class 3 materials.

WHILE GENDER-NEUTRAL picture depictions in Kerala’s school textbooks – which challenge norms of patriarchy – are widely appreciated, beyond the State board, students in schools in Kerala and across the country, affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education are at the mercy of ideologically motivated, politically biased revisions of textbooks that are nation-wide supposed to be provided by the NCERT ( National Council of Educational Research and Training), a government organisation. There are more than 27,000 schools in India and 240 schools in 28 foreign countries affiliated to the CBSE. All schools affiliated to CBSE follow the NCERT curriculum, especially from classes 9 to 12.

The fourth round of such revision in NCERT stirred controversy in 2022; the books are supposed to be revised every three years. In the name of lessening the burden and syllabus rationalisation, NCERT is again being criticised for being politically motivated.

Changes in the 12th Political Science textbook

The Babari Masjid misses mention in the latest Class 12 Political Science textbooks. It is referred to as a three-pillar dome. Moreover, all mention of the communal violence post-Babari Masjid demolition has been deleted from this edition of the book. Similarly, there have been modifications in the text referring to the Gujarat riots of 2002, and the pogrom carried out against Muslims. Also, the Ayodhya section, which earlier covered four pages, has been reduced to two pages. It just focuses on the Supreme Court decision of 2019, which facilitated the construction of Ram Mandir, without any mention of any controversy. Moreover, the question, ‘What is the legacy of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement and the Ayodhya demolition for the nature of political mobilisation?’ has been changed to ‘What is the legacy of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement?’ The reason offered by the NCERT for this round of modifications has been, ‘to bring the initial questions in synchronisation with the internal latest changes made in the chapter’. It other words, this is a blatant attempt to obliterate historical truths from content provided to young adult citizens of India.

The earlier paragraph on the Gujarat riot read, ‘Do you notice references to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in the news collage on this page? These references reflect the growing awareness of human rights and struggles for human dignity. Many cases of human rights violations in diverse fields, for instance, Gujarat riots, are being brought to the public’s notice from across India’. This has been now is modified as, ‘Many cases of human rights violations in diverse fields are being brought to the public’s notice from across India’.

Another paragraph in regard to Muslims earlier read: ‘According to the 2011 census, Muslims are 14.2 per cent of India’s population and are considered to be a marginalised community in India today because, in comparison to other communities, they have over the years been deprived of the benefits of socio-economic development.’ This now reads, ‘According to the 2011 census, Muslims are 14.2 per cent of India’s population and are considered to be a marginalised community because of their having comparatively lower status of socio-economic development’.

In reference to the Godhra riots, a chapter on ‘Secularism’ mentioned the massacre of Muslims, which is now reduced to ‘people’, setting a more neutral tone.

The BJP’s Rath Yatra from Somnath in Gujarat to Ayodhya; the role of kar sevaks; President’s rule in a BJP-ruled State; and BJP’s expression of ‘regret over happenings at Ayodhya’ have also been deleted in the new edition. The deletion of the text on President’s Rule in a BJP-ruled State is an effort to camouflage the political consequences faced by the party. Similarly, the removal of kar sevaks and the BJP’s regret over violence mitigate the negative portrayal of the BJP support base and presents the party as firm and unapologetic about happenings.

There are many paragraphs that have been modified and collages deleted from textbooks. Here two modified paragraphs are mentioned, just to show why NCERT is being pilloried for being politically motivated and accused of its only aim being, to fulfil the present government’s Hindutva agenda.
Also in Class 11 Political Science book, in a chapter titled, ‘Secularism’ – which till the last edition taught students that there is little evidence that vote bank politics favours minority – the latest update includes a new paragraph. The paragraph reads, ‘In India, vote bank politics is also associated with minority appeasement. This means that the political parties disregard the principles of equality of all citizens and give priority to the interests of a minority group’. The use of politically charged terms like ‘minority appeasement’ clearly shows alignment of the institution with the ideological stance of the ruling government and discredits the minorities and all affirmative action towards them. This may also lead to development of scepticism toward minority-focused policy in the future and highly impact the voting patterns.

What are the implications of these changes?

These changes notably omit or alter the historical events and ignore the whys and all that happened. The erasure of incidents of the demolition of the Babari Masjid and the Gujarat riots will give students a sanitised version of history, which can lead to a skewed understanding of contemporary India and the complexities of communal violence. This will also lead to a lack of critical understanding among students to question such controversial incidents.

A generation that is less informed about such incidents will have a frail understanding of the sociopolitical dynamics of the country, which continues to impact the country to this day. Deletion of Gujarat riots also reduce the chances of political backlash in the future. By using a more neutral tone, it shields political figures and dilutes the state’s responsibility in such situations.

In the chapter titled ‘Understanding Marginalisation’, modifications downplay the systemic oppression faced by Muslims in the country and talks about socioeconomic status in a more generalised way, which seems to align with a narrative that avoids institutional biases.

The modifications pose a question on the integrity and objectivity of the NCERT, which is expected to provide unbiased content with diverse viewpoints. The politically manipulated modifications will pose questions of credibility in the long run over NCERT content.

NCERT director Dinesh Saklani justified the change, saying discussions of riots will cause negativity, creating more violent citizens. In regard to modifications of the Ayodhya text, the organisation says it has given the update as per recent political developments. Saklani has also stated, ‘The same hue and cry was not made about the 1984 riots not being there in textbooks’, which only shows how right-wing he is.

Opposition parties are criticising the changes promoting the RSS agenda, which is seen as an ally of the NDA. AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi criticised the textbook revisions, saying children should not grow up glorifying the criminal acts. Further, he said, ‘NCERT has also decided to call the Ayodhya judgment an example of ‘consensus’. India’s children should know that the same Supreme Court called the demolition of Babri Masjid an ‘egregious criminal act’.

Senior Congress leader Jairam Ramesh alleged NCERT is no longer a professional institute and has been functioning as an ally of the RSS since 2014.

Yogendra Yadav and Suhas Palishkar, who were the chief advisers for political science textbooks for classes 9 to 12, wrote to NCERT’s director Dinesh Saklani, warning about legal actions if their names are not dropped. Recently, in their latest letter to the Council’s director, these two scholars wrote, ‘Besides the earlier practice of selective deletions, the NCERT has resorted to significant additions and rewriting that are out of sync with the spirit of the original textbooks’. Even last year too, Yadav and Palishkar asked NCERT to withdraw their names, but the Council has refused to comply with their request, stating its ‘copyright ownership’.

NCERT textbooks are taught in almost 30,000 CBSE schools; hence, these modifications are going to impact a very high number of students. The modifications in the last two years have consistently given rise to controversies. The sanitised version of controversial historical happenings and narratives, significant shift in presentation of political narratives, downplaying the inequalities in society, and omitting the unequal impacts of development projects will lead to a less-informed and less empathetic generation. These changes seem to amplify a narrative that aligns with present government policy.

Such modification highlights the urgent need for transparency and public accountability in updating educational content. Moreover, there is a need for academic freedom so that educational content presents the consensus of scholars rather than the fulfilment of political agendas. Legal frameworks must be strengthened to avoid such undue political interference.

If such changes are not criticized, they may become the norm, and future generations may accept them as an official narrative that is one-sided and omits the complexities of events.

Holistic education requires diverse viewpoints and multiple perspectives to analyse the events critically. The modification will hinder the development of a balanced viewpoint able to understand and respect the differences and diversity of India.

Ideally, we need well-informed and non-violent citizens, but such modifications by NCERT pose serious questions in front of us: ‘Do we need non-violent citizens at the cost of a failed understanding of the historical and multifaceted, complex socio-political dynamics of the country?’ And is there any guarantee that future Indian citizens will not be violent against minority communities, especially when they have no understanding of what minority communities have suffered in modern India.

(Author: Tamanna is pursuing her master’s in sociology at JNU Delhi and in the process of connecting theory and empirical incidents)