Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin may have his political reasons for opposing the implementation of Hindi through the 3-language formula, but shifting to a two-language formula in the face of growing needs for scientific education and the challenges of Artificial Intelligence would be a prudent step. 

The three-language formula, based on Nehru’s principles of national unity, may have been suitable for its time, but the new demands of a technology-driven world call for a practical shift. In an era of rapid scientific advancements, AI, and global competition, India’s education system must adapt to focus on essential skills.

Read in Hindi: दो भाषा फॉर्मूला ही है उचित, तीसरी भाषा हो ‘विज्ञान’...

To empower students and enhance their learning experience, a two-language formula, one’s mother tongue along with either Hindi or English, could be a timely and attractive initiative. The primary goal is to reduce the academic burden on students.

The current three-language system often diverts valuable time and energy away from critical subjects like Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics, which are the foundation of innovation and economic growth. Mastery in these subjects is crucial for India’s future. By reducing the focus on additional languages, students can concentrate on these core areas, enhancing their global competitiveness.

Studies show that the need to learn multiple languages can hinder mastery in core subjects. By focusing on the mother tongue and either Hindi or English, students can achieve a deeper understanding and skills, building a strong educational foundation.

The historical context of the 3-language formula, including language riots and the Official Languages Act, highlights the complexities and sensitivities surrounding language policy in India. However, clinging to outdated models in the face of changing needs would be unwise. The political nuances of the past should not overshadow the practical realities of the present.

The effectiveness of the 3-language formula has also been questioned. Its implementation has been inconsistent, often falling prey to political and logistical challenges. Moreover, the argument that a third language significantly enhances cognitive abilities or career opportunities is unfounded. On the contrary, 21st-century job markets increasingly value skills like coding, data analytics, and digital literacy.

With the advent of AI-driven translation tools, the need to learn multiple languages for basic communication has diminished. These tools provide effective and accessible solutions to overcome language barriers, making the emphasis on a third language less relevant.

Instead of continuing debates over the three-language policy, India should prioritize educational reforms that empower students to succeed in a rapidly changing world. By focusing on quality over quantity in language education, embracing modern technology, and aligning with global standards, India can better prepare its youth for future challenges and opportunities. The two-language formula represents a practical and forward-thinking approach, ensuring that India’s education system remains relevant and effective in the 21st century.

According to public commentator Prof Paras Nath Chaudhary, Nehru’s 3-language formula, developed to promote national unity and linguistic diversity, has now become a burden rather than a benefit in the current educational landscape.

First proposed in the 1950s and revised by the Kothari Commission in 1966, the 3-language formula’s implementation led to language riots. In the then Madras State, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam spearheaded the anti-Hindi movement. To address their concerns, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru enacted the Official Languages Act in 1963, ensuring the continued use of English after 1965.

The debate over the 2-language versus 3-language formula in education, especially in a diverse country like India, is complex and multifaceted. Most developed countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Japan focus primarily on one or two languages in their education systems. These nations emphasize proficiency in their mother tongue and English for global communication. India, aspiring to be a global leader, could adopt a similar approach to make education more effective and align with international standards.

While linguistic diversity is India’s strength, forcing students to learn a third language can lead to resentment and resistance, especially if the language is perceived as irrelevant to their daily lives or career aspirations.

The two-language formula levels the playing field, ensuring that students from all backgrounds can compete equally without the additional burden of a third language. In a competitive global economy, employers value technical and analytical skills over linguistic proficiency in multiple languages.