CBSE mother tongue policy should be implemented through dialogue, not diktat

Indian Express

17 hours ago

As of May, the Central Board of Secondary Education has released approximately 30 academic circulars and numerous examination, affiliation and miscellaneous documents. These include assessment guidelines, teacher training programmes, student enrichment activities, curriculum updates and policy implementation. Educators are now grappling with the latest, mandating the implementation of mother tongue-based instruction in the foundational and preparatory stages of schooling.
From the Kothari Commission (1964 to 1966) to the National Policy of Education (1968), the Yashpal Committee (1993), National Curriculum Framework (2005, NCF) along with UNESCO, NCERT and numerous global developmental psychologists and even the National Education Policy (2020) have all highlighted the importance of mother tongue-based learning in foundational years (three-eight years). The NCF 2023 directed schools to make the process more structured and explicit, and align it with global best practices.
Several studies show that children learn best when taught in their home language because it brings emotional security and concept retention. In fact, it has been argued that learning in an unfamiliar language disconnects the child from real-world experiences, reduces classroom participation and often delays understanding. In places where tribal languages or dialects have been set aside, this step can pave the way towards linguistic equity and educational justice. This is an aspirational policy, but the learning ecosystem is fragmented. In order to implement it in letter and spirit, all stakeholders will have to be involved.
Schools can create a language policy after surveying the home languages of their students. With schools mapping language groups and deciding on bridge programmes by allocating resources and teachers accordingly, parents can make an informed choice. In heterogeneous schools, using the mother tongue is not about enforcing one language, it's about embracing linguistic plurality and making children visible. In order to respond through a balanced strategy, parents have to be informed that both the NEP and the NCF support additive bilingualism with strong foundations in the home language along with systematic learning of English. If the mother tongue is positioned as the foundation and English layered in contextually, it will become a bridge.
Across socio-economic strata, Indian parents see English-medium education from the foundational years as the key to success. For some, mother-tongue instruction feels regressive. There will be an aspirational mismatch because the mindset behind English-medium education has been driven by media, advertising and peer pressure. Teachers will be left to mediate between parental anxiety and policy mandates, without support or community engagement.
Teachers may themselves feel overwhelmed by the push towards mother tongue-based multilingual instruction, especially in heterogeneous English medium schools. Most teachers are trained to teach in English or Hindi, or their regional language and English, not in pedagogical strategies or multilingualism. Handling multiple languages without lesson plans can be difficult for them. Assessment also offers challenges in evaluating learning across languages, especially when tools are monolingual. Teachers are expected to manage language equity, curriculum delivery and concept clarity without training, material, or time. Support, not imposition, is the way forward, if we want multilingualism to become a strength, not a burden.
A teacher may speak the mother tongue fluently but may not be able to explain concepts pedagogically in that language. He or she may lack academic vocabulary or age-appropriate phrases. They may not know how to create learning materials or assess learning in the language. Unless they are trained to teach the language, the instruction will not succeed. Parents, too, need to be made partners in this transition. It is important to give them a roadmap of how children will transition in reading and writing fluently in both their mother tongue and in English.
A greater load has been added without reducing academic responsibilities. Planning for a multilingual class requires more time, in addition to the regular work that teachers do. If we want children to learn with joy and meaning, then their teachers must be supported with empathy, time and trust. The policy has to be a dialogue, not a diktat.
Mother tongue-based education is a vital tool in addressing the global learning crisis. In order for it to succeed, the CBSE and state education departments must move beyond circulars and compliances to systemic support, or the gap between policy and practice will widen.
Schools should be given a two-to-three-year transition window starting with oral exposure, creating classroom levels for language mapping, developing multilingual lesson plans, differentiated assessments, resource kits and teaching aids. Oral and non-verbal rubrics that measure conceptual understanding need to be created. Experienced multilingual resource persons should conduct workshops for teachers of foundational years because they need to be partners in reform. A common instructional language should be chosen, while the mother tongue can be taught through songs, stories, language activities, traditional games, audio libraries and AI-driven technologies.
Urban schools, especially in metros, are an example of India's internal migration and cultural plurality. Classrooms include children who speak a variety of mother tongues — Malayalam, Bengali, Tamil. Marathi, Kannada and others — within the same learning space. This linguistic landscape calls for context-sensitive handling rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.
The policy has great potential but without clarity in execution, it will become merely symbolic. The benefit of the mother tongue in the foundational years can only be realised with the help of supportive parents and trained teachers, who will design it not merely as a linguistic shift but a reimagining of childhood and learning.
The writer is chairperson and executive director, Education, Innovations and Training, DLF Foundation Schools and Scholarship Programmes