Problems with this material: originally appeared in journals and other sources, have been put together as a book which makes for some repetition on one hand, and without updating statistics etc. some material is out of date. Issues he raises are useful ones, however.

1. Chapter 11: Language in School Education in India:

This chapter is concerned with which languages are taught as subjects in Indian schools, and how the various states implement the Three-Language Formula that is the language policy of India.

Table 11.2 (p. 278-9) gives data on which languages are taught at which levels, inwhich states and territories: (Note absence of data for Sikkim; an error?)

Table 11.2: Major Languages in School Education (Classes in Roman Numerals)
State/Union Territory	Official Language	First Language	Second Language	Third Language
Andhra Pradesh	Telugu	Telugu (I-X)	Hindi (V-X)	English (V- X)
Assam	Assamese	Assamese/Bengali (I-XI)	English (IV-XI)	Hindi/Bengali (IV-XI)
Bihar	Hindi	Hindi (I-X)	Sanskrit (IV-XI)	E nglish (VI-XI)
Gujarat	Gujarati	Gujarati (I-XI)	Hindi (V-XI)	English (V-XI)
Haryana	Hindi	Hindi (I-XI)	English (VI-XI)	Urdu (VII-XI)
Himachal Pradesh	Hindi	Hindi (I-XI)	English (VI-XI)	Urdu/Sanskrit (VI -XI)
Jammu & Kashmir	asan Urdu	Urdu (I-XI), Kashmiri/Dogri (I-III)	English (VI-X)	English/Classical Lang. (VI-X)
Karnataka	Kannada	Kannada (I-X)	English (V-X)	Hindi (VI-X)
Kerala	Malayalam	Malayalam(I-X)	English (IV-X)	Hindi(V-X)
Madhya Pradesh	Hindi/Marathi	Hindi (I-XI)	Sanskrit (VII-XI)	English (VI-XI)
Maharashtra	Marathi	Marathi (I-XI)	Hindi (V-XI)	English (V-XI)
Manipur	English	Manipuri/(Bengali/Hindi) (I-XI)	English (III-XI)	Hindi (IV-XI)
Meghalaya	English	Khasi (I-XI)	English (VI-XI)	Hindi (IV-VIII)
Nagaland	English	14 languages (A-IV) 16 languages (IV-VII) 2 languages (IV-X)	English (I-X)	Hindi (V-VIII)
Orissa	Oriya	Oriya (I-XI)	Hindi (IV-XI)	English (VI-XI)
Punjab	Punjabi	Punjabi (I-XI)	Hindi (IV-XI)	English (VI-XI)
Rajasthan	Hindi	Hindi (I-XI)	English (VI-XI)	Sanskrit (VI-XI)
Sikkim	(no data)	(no data)	(no data)	(no data)
Tamil Nadu	Tamil	Tamil (I-XI)	English (III-XI)	-
Tripura	English	Bengali (I-XI)	English (III-XI)	Hindi/Sanskrit
Uttar Pradesh	Hindi	Hindi (I-XI)	English (VI-XII)	Sanskrit (VI-XII)
West Bengal	Bengali	Bengali (I-XI)	English (III-XI)	Hindi (VI-XI)
Andaman & Nicobar Islands	English/Hindi	9MTs (I-V) 3MTs (VI-XI)	English (IV-XI)	Hindi (III-X)
Arunachal Pradesh	English	14MTs/English (A-XI)	Hindi (III-IX)	Assamese/Sanskrit (IV-XI)
Chandigarh	English	Hindi/Punjabi (I-XI)	Hindi (IV-XI)	English (VI-XI)
Dadra & Nagar Haveli	English	Gujarati/Hindi/English (I-XI)	Hindi (V-XI)	English(V-XI)
Delhi	Hindi	Hindi (I-XI)	Hindi/Sanskrit (IV-XI)	English (VI-XI)
Goa, Daman & Diu	English	8 languages (I-IV) 4 languages (V-X)	English (III-X)	Hindi (V-X)
Lakshadweep	English/Hindi	Malayalam (I-XI)	English (III-X)	Hindi (IV-XI)
Mizoram	English	Mizo (A-XI)	English (IV-X)	-
Pondicherry	English	4 languages(I-XI)	English(III-XI)	-
(Mahe, Yanam)	(no data?)	(no data?)	English (III-X)	Hindi (V-X)

Source: Chaturvedi and Mohale (1976).

BHK recommends the following:

• Teach through mother tongue at least through primary level.
• Streamline the uses of various languages in the system.
• Modernize languages wherever possible. Allow for better mother tongue instruction. (Modernize: update the language with modern vocabulary; develop technical and scientific registers? Eliminate diglossia if possible?)
• Allow for flexibility and variability, i.e. don't adhere to rigid system but recognize pluralism.
• Follow the language policy:
• Some states don't teach Hindi at all!
• Hindi states don't' teach another Indian language!
• Improve implementation of policy; make policy clear; modernize the curriculum
• Admit that where the language policy is weak, fix it:
• where a language. not recognized by 8th schedule is used, add it to the 8th schedule (such as Manipuri).
• If language is used in newspapers, use it for education.
• Stateless minority languages. are not taught, but min. languages of larger states (even if smaller than stateless minorities) are taught.
• Extending the domain of the DRL's (dominant regional languages) in primary and secondary education: what is the solution?

At the moment, switching from DRL to English is haphazard: sometimes happens in sec. school, sometimes between sec. school and college, sometimes between college and post-grad. Register formation has not been allowed to develop.

• Change the constitution:

• Make all 68 minority languages. with more than one lakh of speakers official languages.
• Defend the `stateless' minority languages. in states with DRL.
• Follow directive 350A:

It shall be the endeavour of every state and of every local authority within the State to provide adequate facilities for instruction in the mother tongue at the primary stage of education to children belonging to linguistic minority groups, and the President may issue such directions to any State as he considers necessary or proper for securing the provision of such facilities

• Make the Hindi States introduce a modern language of India (other than Skt. or Urdu) as they are required by the 3-language formula to do. Make incentives for civil service employees to learn them, for advancement etc.
• Convert the business lg. of the state government to the DRL of the state [as now being done in Tamilnadu, via computer, hs].
• Make an action plan on behalf of the minority languages:

BhK Gives various recommendations:

• set up linguistic institutes,
• train local people,
• prepare materials,
• prepare literacy materials for adults,
• follow recommendations of committees, commissions.
• Expand the roles of all these languages and DRL's and
• reduce the role of English.

---

• Chapter 12: Literacy Models in Developing Multilingual Nations.

BhK begins by pointing out that India has the largest number of illiterates (though not the highest illiteracy rates) in Asia (figures based on 1981 census). Gives comparisons with Indonesia, Philippines, Pakistan, Burma, etc.

Within India, (ignoring large cities and UT's like Delhi) Kerala and Mizoram have the lowest rates of illiteracy.

To make a long story short, BHK finds the programs designed to enhance literacy to be a complete failure.

1. Personnel are poorly trained
2. Materials they use are poorly designed, poorly graded, poor choice of vocabulary etc.
3. No follow up, no follow through
4. People who have had some schooling do better than 'freshers'
5. Much backsliding, waste of time and effort.
6. Lack of input from trained linguists

What has worked: in areas where illiteracy was left to the District officers (e.g. Ernakulam plan) there was more success. Should be locally planned, locally controlled, local follow-up. Top-heavy burocracies don't work well in this. Use local resources such as local schools, local volunteers, local college students etc. Curriculum development and materials preparation are the weakest part.

Positive effects of neo-literates:

1. Positively influence the education of their children
2. Less gender disparity within the family
3. Letter health, knowledge of hygiene, etc. Lower infant mortality
4. Manage family finances better
5. Better able to give up bad habits.
6. Better employable skills.

Tables 12.2 to 12.6 give various rates of illiteracy.

Findings:

• Illiteracy is higher in Hindi areas (UP, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan) than anywhere else.
• Areas where missionaries were active (e.g. Kerala and Mizoram) have lower rates of illiteracy and higher literacy rates.
• Northern states have higher rates of illiteracy than southern
• Some multilingual states have higher rates than monolingual [and Kerala, which has the highest rate of monolingualism, 94% Malayalam, has the highest literacy rate. (hs)]
• Smaller states/territories which until recently were in French or Portuguese hands have higher literacy rates.