Education or Politics: What really drives the Policy?

Education or Politics? What Really Drives the Policy?

If education policies in India were truly focused on transforming learning, our children would be thriving. But unfortunately, politics often overshadows real educational reform.

The latest example comes from Maharashtra. The State Government initially made Hindi mandatory as a third language from Classes 1 to 5. Facing backlash, it quickly changed the rule to make Hindi optional. Seizing the moment, political rivals Raj and Uddhav Thackeray united—more for political mileage than out of concern for education. They stirred Marathi pride and opposed the move. In the end, the government withdrew the decision and, as usual, formed a committee—one that’s unlikely to reach any real conclusion.

What this episode clearly showed was: Mr. Devendra Fadnavis aimed to align with the Central Government’s preferences, while the Thackerays wanted to regain their fading political influence. Whether either succeeded or not, one thing is certain—none of this had anything to do with improving education for children.

This is the unfortunate truth not just in Maharashtra, but across many Indian states. Language politics becomes a tool for political gain, not for improving student learning.

Just take a look at the ASER 2024 Rural Report. Only 37% of Class 3 students can read a Class 2-level Marathi passage. That’s a shameful improvement of only 3 percentage points in a decade. Have we ever heard the so-called champions of Marathi express concern about this? Have they proposed serious solutions?

This is not a phenomenon happens only in Maharashtra. Almost in all non-Hindi speaking states, it is the same - TN, Karnataka, West Bengal, Kerala etc., And for those who loudly support adding a third language—have they ever explained how struggling schools, already unable to meet basic reading standards, will handle even more responsibility without proper teachers, training, or resources? Of course not. Their focus is not on improving learning, but on winning votes.

Macaulay is often criticised for creating a mindset that devalues Indians, India's legacy and its languages. Maybe that criticism is fair. But today’s language-based politics may be doing even more harm. It spreads the false idea that promoting one Indian language requires pushing down another. That’s simply not true. Learning more languages should be seen as an asset, not a threat.

Sadly, these false divisions are used for political gains. They lead to social tensions, hurt internal migrants, and weaken national unity. Even attacking English—now a vital skill for global careers—does damage to India’s progress.

If not a national language, we at least need a link language, and Hindi is well-suited for that role. The real question is: Do our political leaders have the courage and clarity to support this vision, keeping the future of our children and the unity of our nation in mind?