Language in Education Policy: For a Multilingual India

Author: Anvesha Kaustubh Kukde - Shiv Nadar School - Faridabad

Executive Summary

India’s vast linguistic diversity poses unique challenges and opportunities within its education sector. With 22 scheduled languages and hundreds of other spoken languages, this diversity can give Indian students a significant edge in cognitive development, cross-cultural communication, and adaptability if this rich linguistic tapestry is harnessed strategically. This paper explores the trade-offs and benefits of various linguistic approaches in education up to the 10th grade. These approaches include the preservation of tribal languages and local dialects, the enforcement of learning scheduled languages, the nationwide use of Hindi, and ensuring access to education in English-medium schools. Furthermore, many institutions also emphasize the importance of learning foreign languages or classical languages like Sanskrit.

A multitude of arguments are presented by educational institutions, students, politicians, and each state to justify their views, ranging from advocating for English to provide access to global opportunities to promoting Hindi to foster a unified national identity. The debate is not only about which languages to learn but also how many to learn at once, howto introduce them sequentially, and most importantly, why certain languages are prioritized.

This paper employs a SWOT analysis framework to assess the current language-in-education policies and their effectiveness, followed by Mendelow’s matrix for analyzing stakeholders who influence or are influenced by the policy. Finally, it applies the inferences from the SWOT and stakeholder analyses to a theory of change framework to aid in suggesting better-suited policies. Due to the subjective and complex nature of this issue, case studies supplement this theoretical analysis, providing crucial insights into practical challenges and nuances that might otherwise be overlooked.

Introduction and Scope

Background on Language in India

According to the 2011 census, there are 121 languages considered ‘classified mother tongues’ in India¹. In a country with such immense ethnic, religious, cultural, and linguistic diversity, these languages serve as a mode of community identity and unity. They are also deeply ingrained within the political and religious discourse of not only the country but South Asia as a whole. From accusations of the imposition of Urdu on Bengalis and Hindi on Tamilians to the historical imposition of English by the British, language has been a sensitive and contentious subject in the region that requires careful consideration.

Many languages hold the title of ‘scheduled languages’, ‘classical languages’, and ‘official languages’ in India. Scheduled languages are listed in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution of India, which is meant to promote and preserve them. Assamese, Bengali, Bodo, Dogri, Gujarati, Hindi, Kannada, Kashmiri, Konkani, Maithili, Malayalam, Manipuri, Marathi, Nepali, Odia, Punjabi, Sanskrit, Santhali, Sindhi, Tamil, Telugu, and Urdu are the scheduled languages. While there are currently 22 scheduled languages, demands exist for the inclusion of as many as 38 more². India also recognizes 11 classical languages, valued for their cultural heritage and vast literary traditions³. Hindi (in Devanagari script) and English are the two official languages of the Union government and are, therefore, used for all official purposes such as government documentation and communication⁴. Although there are classifications for languages at multiple levels, it is a crucial fact that India has no single national language.

However, languages are not discrete systems; they are far more complex. A great example is Hindi and Urdu, together referred to as Hindustani by the British colonizers. They are mutually intelligible in their modern spoken form. The primary difference lies in their scripts and literary vocabularies; purer forms of Hindi draw from Sanskrit for vocabulary, while Urdu draws heavily from Persian and Arabic⁵. Such cases require individual consideration in policy design. This multilingual society also makes code-switching—the practice of switching back and forth between languages when speaking—commonplace in India, further complicating the linguistic landscape. Code-switching can be linked to gaps in knowledge of individual languages as well as an attempt at more fluent communication by incorporating multiple languages into speech⁶. The most common example of this is Hinglish, a blend of Hindi and English. These linguistic realities emphasize the critical importance of tailoring any policy to India's unique context.

Background on the Education System

The languages a student learns are primarily dependent on the curriculum with which their school is affiliated. Education falls under the Concurrent List of the Constitution, allowing both the state and central governments to legislate on it, which occasionally results in conflicts of interest⁷. In India, there are primarily state boards, national boards (like CBSE and CISCE), and international boards (like IB and Cambridge)⁸. The national and state curricula are designed by government-appointed individuals, while international curricula are run by other organizations.

The language used as the 'medium of instruction' is critically important because it serves as the primary mode of communication between educators and students, and all subjects are taught through it. Most prevalent curricula use the official languages or scheduled languages as 'mediums'. Schools can be run by either private organizations or the government. In colonial India, the East India Company often implemented policies aimed at promoting European literature and scientific knowledge, which consequently promoted the English language. Ever since the Wood's Despatch of 1854, both English and vernacular languages have been used as mediums in educational institutions⁹.

Post-independence, the University Education Commission (1948-1949) was appointed to assess education in India and suggest improvements. It laid the groundwork for the language-in-education policy by suggesting that the introduction of languages be done gradually⁹. It recommended mother-tongue education from the 1st to 5th grade, after which the federal language would be incorporated alongside the mother tongue⁹. From the 9th grade onwards, English would also be introduced⁹. If a student's mother tongue was a federal language itself, they would be required to study another classical or modern Indian language⁹. This was the first mention of a three-language-formula-like system, which remains influential today. Although this formula has been relevant for years, the policy adopted in 1986 later placed strong emphasis on the nationwide implementation of the three-language formula¹⁰. In 2020, the new National Education Policy (NEP) was introduced, which echoes this foundational three-language formula.

Current Policy: NEP 2020 and the Three-Language Formula

The Three-Language Formula in NEP 2020

The NEP 2020 is a recommendatory document that envisions significant changes in India's education system to make it more rooted in the Indian ethos. The changes it suggests to the approach in language education are most relevant to this paper. The policy emphasizes multilingualism and the use of mother tongues or local languages in education, proposing a three-language formula with increased flexibility. It specifically states that no language is to be imposed on any state and that two of the three languages taught should be native to India. The choice of these languages is intended to be a collaborative decision between the state, region, schools, and the students themselves. The medium of instruction should be the mother tongue or regional language until at least Grade 5, and ideally until Grade 8. Bilingual approaches and textbooks are encouraged, especially for science and mathematics. Sanskrit, other classical languages, and foreign languages at the secondary level are to be made widely available. The NEP 2020 also promotes experiential teaching methods, proposes a project on India's linguistic diversity, and supports the standardization of Indian Sign Language (ISL)¹¹.

These recommendations have been readily adopted in some states, while others have strongly opposed the concept.

State Actors Resisting the Three-Language Formula

Many states have raised concerns regarding the NEP's practicality and its perceived bias towards Hindi. These are predominantly non-Hindi-speaking states. The states of Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and West Bengal, in particular, have voiced significant opposition to the three-language policy under the NEP 2020¹².

Tamil Nadu’s chief minister and deputy chief minister have made public remarks to the media and on social media platforms expressing their opposition¹³. They suspect it is an attempt to impose Hindi under the guise of supporting all Indian languages. As education is a Concurrent List subject, Tamil Nadu continues with its two-language approach of Tamil and English. According to a 2023 report from a conference of vice-chancellors and the governor of Tamil Nadu, the implementation of some NEP recommendations, such as the creation of technical subject textbooks in Indian languages, has begun; however, the state continues to focus on its two-language policy: one Indian language (Tamil) and one foreign language (English)¹⁴. The central government withheld funds from Tamil Nadu for the Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan initiative in the 2024-2025 financial year, a scheme that provides equitable schooling for underprivileged students¹⁵. The subsequent media outburst, discussing how the state's ruling party sued the central government for allegedly unlawfully holding back these funds because of their stance on NEP 2020, further damaged the public perception of the NEP.

State Actors in Favour of the Three-Language Formula

Many states support the NEP and most of the major reforms it suggests. For example, Haryana has mandated English and Hindi for Grade 9 and 10 students, effective from the 2025-26 academic year, with the option to choose Sanskrit, Punjabi, or Urdu as the third language¹⁶. In Andhra Pradesh, Minister Nara Lokesh defends the policy, stating that NEP does not make Hindi mandatory as one of the three languages but rather emphasizes choice, including the mother tongue as the medium of instruction¹⁷. Many also see Hindi as a language with the potential to unite the country.

SWOT Analysis of the Three-Language Policy under NEP 2020

This SWOT analysis highlights the internal strengths and weaknesses as well as the external opportunities and threats of the three-language formula under NEP 2020.

Strengths

• Builds on Existing Framework: This policy ensures feasibility by building upon the existing three-language policy framework instead of creating a new one from scratch, which is practical for a country with such a large population.

• Local Resource Availability: By promoting the local language as the preferred medium of education, it ensures that teachers can be sourced locally.

• Prevents Imposition: Explicitly mentioning that “No language will be imposed on any state” prevents the policy from being misinterpreted as favouring any one language or being misused for linguistic imposition.

• Fosters Unity: The policy fosters cultural understanding and exchange within the country through languages and the exchange of educators, which is essential to unity in such a diverse nation.

• Promotes Indian Literature: The policy can have huge benefits for the promotion and preservation of diverse Indian literature, a method proven effective for promoting literature, as employed historically by the British colonizers.

• Cognitive Benefits: The cognitive benefits of multilingualism have been echoed by many scientific studies. For example, a study published by the National Institutes of Health concludes that multilingualism enhances neuroplasticity and strengthens the cognitive reserve.

Weaknesses

• Vague Implementation Strategy: The policy is at times vague in terms of its implementation strategy, making the process longer and its feasibility difficult to judge. For example, it mentions that students, regions, and states will collaborate to decide the languages taught but provides no elaboration on how this coordination will be achieved.

• Potential for Internal Conflicts: Regions within states, much like states within the country, are susceptible to the same kinds of disagreements that occur between state and central governments.

• Increased Burden: Each new language taught is an additional subject that not only burdens students but also requires more resources and educators in an education system already strained by overpopulation.

Opportunities

• Digital Learning: This policy is a great opportunity to incorporate digital learning tools into education that can aid in learning languages not spoken in a student's immediate region.

• Standardization of Vernacular Terms: The development of multilingual textbooks in technical subjects, as mentioned in NEP 2020, can accelerate the creation and standardization of technical terms in vernacular languages.

Threats

• Identity Politics: Language has always been linked to identity politics in South Asia and is a sensitive issue, as seen in the case of Tamil Nadu.

• Risk of Homogenization: The overwhelming amount of Hindi teaching resources and educators could cause a disproportionate increase in Hindi courses offered compared to other Indian languages, reinforcing the fear of linguistic homogenization.

• Implementation Delays: Since education is a concurrent subject, disagreements between state and central authorities can slow implementation.

• Increased Inequality: The policy may increase inequality. For example, urban English-medium schools may be able to overlook regional languages, while rural schools might overlook foreign languages due to a lack of resources, making strict monitoring essential.

Stakeholder Mapping

Using Mendelow’s matrix, all stakeholders for any proposed language-in-education policy in India are mapped on a grid based on high or low power and interest. Here, 'power' is defined as the direct ability to affect policy decisions, and 'interest' is defined as the degree to which policy decisions affect the stakeholder. This data is provided in a concise tabular form in the final section of this paper.

• High Power, High Interest (Key Players): In this category fall both the state and central governments and the Finance Ministry. The state and central governments can legislate these policies, while the Finance Ministry allocates the necessary funds. This means they have a direct role in creating the policy and must adapt their actions in response to public reception. These stakeholders must be managed closely as they are the key players affecting the policy's effectiveness.

• Low Power, High Interest (Keep Informed): In this category fall students, parents, and teachers, as well as rural and government-run schools, NGOs, and linguistic minority groups. Students, parents, and teachers are all directly affected, but their large numbers and varying outlooks dilute their collective power. The success of NGO missions often depends on policy outcomes, yet they have low direct power unless they can generate significant public support. Rural and government schools cannot simply choose alternative curricula, and linguistic minority groups represent a small percentage of the population for their opinions to be accounted for directly in nationwide policy. All these stakeholders must be kept well-informed of all policy decisions and updates.

• High Power, Low Interest (Keep Satisfied): Within this category falls the judiciary, which, while not directly affected by the policy's content, adjudicates Centre-State conflicts and protects minority rights. Therefore, this stakeholder must be 'kept satisfied,' meaning any policy must strictly abide by constitutional law.

• Low Power, Low Interest (Minimal Effort): Finally, companies that produce teaching resources (Ed-tech firms and publishers), private schools, and international organizations like the UN fall under this category. International organizations may have a stance on the issue but can neither directly establish policies nor are they significantly affected by them. Private schools can generally choose a suitable curriculum if the government-enforced one does not suit their vision. Publishers will naturally produce resources that meet market demand. These stakeholders require less focus as they have less direct involvement with the policy's success.

Proposed Language-in-Education Policy

The course of action suggested in this section proposes a strengthening of the current policy to allow for practical implementation and aid a smooth transition. It will build upon the weaknesses and mitigate the threats identified during the SWOT analysis while taking into consideration the nature of each stakeholder's involvement as identified through the matrix.

The aspects this policy focuses on improving are the clarity of the implementation strategy, addressing the fear of homogenization, and preventing widened inequality between urban and rural communities.

Detailed Implementation Strategy

NEP 2020 has a clear vision and goal yet lacks detail and clarity for effective implementation. Therefore, employing a framework like SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound) goals is recommended.

1. Choosing the First Language: The choice of the first language, which is the medium of instruction until Grade 5, is essential. Since Indian states are already divided linguistically, the majority of schools in each state can employ the standard form of the most spoken scheduled language. At the same time, the curriculum should incorporate literature in other local dialects to help preserve the fluid nature of language. A clear criterion for what constitutes a 'large' school must be established, and the major linguistic minorities of each district must be identified. All ‘large’ schools enrolled with a government curriculum must be mandated to offer at least one section for each significant minority language in their district. Providing different mediums within the same institution also promotes cultural exchange and understanding. This would be in addition to any purely linguistic minority-medium schools already operating in the region. There need to be regular inspections to ensure that all sections, regardless of language, are given the same resources and opportunities to the greatest extent possible. Schools must be given a strict, district-specific 1-5 year timeline to adapt and implement this system.

2. Creating Bilingual Textbooks: A permanent committee must be established, responsible for standardizing technical terms in vernacular languages and continuing to do so as technology and knowledge evolve.

Prevention of Homogenization

Measures need to be taken to prevent a disproportionate increase in the teaching of particular Indian languages (for which more resources are readily available) as second and third languages. This will not only preserve diversity but also alleviate concerns such as Hindi imposition and the loss of linguistic diversity. This can be done by conducting extensive teacher training and promoting the creation of high-quality resources in scheduled languages that are currently not prevalent in school courses. Audits should include language balance indicators, and quotas should be designed accordingly.

Addressing Rural-Urban Inequality

To ensure that the lack of resources for or interest in certain languages does not result in a widening rural-urban divide, this risk needs to be inspected during audits by ensuring that none of the three languages is neglected in any school, regardless of its location.

Conclusion

The language-in-education policy, being a sensitive subject tied to people’s identity and livelihood, is a matter with which it must be handled with compassion and foresight. Policies should be adjusted regularly based on public concerns and technological developments, not just updated once in several decades. Recent developments in AI should be employed in schools, and tools like BharatGPT that are available in vernacular languages should be further developed and integrated into the educational ecosystem.

Tables

Stakeholder Mapping

References

1. Concepts and Definitions: Language Data. Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, language.census.gov.in/infographics/data/showConceptsDefinitions. Accessed 7 Oct. 2025.

2. Constitutional Provisions Relating to Eighth Schedule. 2021, www.mha.gov.in/sites/default/files/EighthSchedule_19052017.pdf.

3. Status of Classical Language: An Explainer. www.pib.gov.in/FeaturesDeatils.aspx?NoteId=153325&ModuleId%20=%202.

4. THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGES ACT, 1963 | Department of Official Language | Ministry of Home Affairs | GoI. rajbhasha.gov.in/en/official-languages-act-1963.

5. King, Christopher R. From Hindi to Urdu: A Social and Political History. Oxford University Press, 1994. PDF file accessed via Cloudfront, https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/41606370/From_Hindi_to_Urdu_a_social_and_politica20160126-14169-i7hv7z-libre.pdf.

6. Tenés, L. T. Schächinger, et al. “Language Proficiency Predictors of Code-switching Behavior in Dual-language-learning Children.” Bilingualism Language and Cognition, vol. 26, no. 5, Mar. 2023, pp. 942–58. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728923000081.

7. Government of India. “THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (Seventh Schedule).” THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, www.mea.gov.in/Images/pdf1/S7.pdf.

8. Rana, Ruby. “Indian Curriculum: Know About Definition, Types, and Features.” 21K School Malaysia, 4 Oct. 2025, www.21kschool.com/my/blog/indian-curriculum.

9. https://www.educationforallinindia.com/1949%20Report%20of%20the%20University%20Education%20Commission.pdf

10. Ministry of Human Resource Development. National Policy on Education 1986: Programme of Action. 1986, www.education.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/upload_document/npe.pdf.

11. Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India. National Education Policy 2020. www.education.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/NEP_Final_English_0.pdf.

12. Today, India. “Supreme Court Rejects Plea Seeking Enforcement of NEP in Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and West Bengal.” India Today, 12 May 2025, bestcolleges.indiatoday.in/news-detail/supreme-court-rejects-plea-seeking-enforcement-of-nep-in-tamil-nadu-kerala-and-west-bengal-3411.

13. HT News Desk. “‘Which 3rd Language Is Taught in North’: MK Stalin Questions Centre Over NEP | Latest News India.” Hindustan Times, 3 Mar. 2025, www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/which-3rd-language-is-taught-in-north-mk-stalin-questions-centre-over-nep-101740997173034.html.

14. HON’BLE GOVERNOR OF TAMIL NADU CHAIRED CONFERENCE OF VICE-CHANCELLORS OF PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES OF TAMIL NADU AND REVIEWED STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF ‘NATIONAL EDUCATION POLICY (NEP-2020) - 20.07.2023 | Raj Bhavan, Tamil Nadu | India. tnrajbhavan.gov.in/honble-governor-of-tamil-nadu-presided-over-the-meeting-with-chancellor-nominees-of-various-bodies-of-state-universities-of-tamil-nadu-at-durbar-hall-raj-bhavan-chennai-today-04-07-2023-2.

15. Budget Speech 2025–26. Finance Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, www.tnbudget.tn.gov.in/tnweb_files/BS_2025_26_ENG_FINAL.pdf.

16. Admin, Site. Haryana to Implement Three-Language Formula in Classes 9 and 10 From 2025. www.newsonair.gov.in/haryana-to-implement-three-language-formula-in-classes-9-and-10-from-2025.

17. ---. “Supreme Court Rejects Plea Seeking Enforcement of NEP in Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and West Bengal.” India Today, 12 May 2025, bestcolleges.indiatoday.in/news-detail/supreme-court-rejects-plea-seeking-enforcement-of-nep-in-tamil-nadu-kerala-and-west-bengal-3411.