NCERT's unsavoury chapter: Calibrated approach a must

THE National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) has reconstituted its curriculum committee in the wake of the Supreme Court’s strong objections to a sub-chapter on the judiciary in a Class-8 textbook. The panel’s revamp seems to be a damage-control exercise by the council, whose credibility has taken a hit. There is no doubt that school textbooks shape young minds, and any mention of constitutional institutions demands careful scrutiny. It’s apparent that the NCERT will now be wary of exposing students to sensitive or controversial content. However, the unsavoury episode has raised questions about the balance between judicial oversight and academic autonomy. Education, especially under frameworks like the National Education Policy 2020, aims to foster critical thinking, inquiry and informed engagement. Shielding students from debates on institutional accountability risks promoting a sanitised understanding of the pillars of democracy.

The Court’s intervention, including a blanket ban on the textbook and directions affecting some academicians, has drawn criticism from a section of the academic community. In a letter to the President, over 50 scholars have described the move as “judicial overreach,” arguing that it stifles debate and undermines pedagogical independence. Their concern is not trivial: if educators fear punitive consequences, curriculum development may become overly cautious, depriving students of nuanced perspectives.

Equally troubling is the precedent of penalising individuals for what is inherently a collaborative academic process. What is needed now is a calibrated approach, not a confrontation between judges and educators. Mechanisms for transparent review, peer evaluation and public consultation could help resolve disputes without resorting to sweeping bans. Ultimately, the goal of education is not to avoid difficult conversations, but to equip students to engage with them responsibly.