IIT Dropouts: How Politicians Killed Young Dreams

<div><em><strong>Sutanu Guru</strong> analyses how politicians fanned regional chauvinism and an anti-English mindset to destroy the lives of students</em></div><div><br><br>IIT Roorkee has been in the news for all the wrong reasons. First came the news that it had expelled 73 students who failed to meet the basic academic performance criteria. After a messy court battle came news two days ago that IIT Roorkee has agreed to take back the students provided they fulfil academic criteria in the future. Then Union HRD Minister Smriti Irani told the Rajya Sabha on August 5 that 2,060 students had dropped out of the 16 IITs between 2012 and 2015. Similarly, 2,352 students dropped out of the 30 NITs in the same period. More revealing was the fact that the dropout rate of 30 per cent at IIT Roorkee was the highest.&nbsp;</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>There are more “revealing” facts. A story in the Indian Express today says that 90 per cent of the drop outs are students who got admitted on quotas reserved for SC, ST and OBC students. An overwhelming majority of these students found their lack of English comprehension skills to be an insurmountable barrier. Most of these students at Roorkee are from Hindi heartland states and gave their Joint Entrance Exams in Hindi. But since virtually all teaching, reference material and interactions at IITs and NITs are in English, these students simply fail to cope. Virtually all the students expelled by IIT Roorkee and then taken back belong to this category. There is one such student who obtained 92 per cent in English in his board exams in Rajasthan and finds the English spoken in the classroom incomprehensible.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>There can be a debate on the elitism that prevails in these institutions of higher learning. There can also be debates about caste and class discrimination of the subtle and brazen variety that denies these students the opportunity to craft a career of their dreams. There can even be a debate on improving the efficacy and effectiveness of affirmative action in India. All that would be worthwhile. But who is really responsible for the plight of these students from Hindi heartland states?</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>It is the politicians who are the real culprits, aided and abetted by “mother tongue” enthusiasts and activists. Between the 1970s and 1990s, two generations of politicians proclaimed their love for Hindi and publicly disdained English as an Imperial language. In states like Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, effective and basic teaching of the English language virtually vanished from the schools. The end result was a few generations of youngsters who lacked even the basic communication-written and spoken-skills in English. For long, these youngsters kept getting hoodwinked by politicians who kept thumping regional and language chauvinism. Of course, the same politicians ensured their own children got the best of “English” education. So the current chief minister of Uttar Pradesh Akhilesh Yadav was busy getting taught in “English” medium institutions in Karnataka and Australia when his father Mulayam Singh Yadav was publicly scorning English and computers.&nbsp;</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>It is only after a brave new world of opportunities that opened up after the 1991 economic reforms that parents and youngsters realized they had been taken for a royal ride. None of these Hindi heartland students could get call center jobs because they lacked basic English skills. &nbsp;For that matter, they failed to get jobs as assistants and sales persons even n malls and super markets that sprung up across India; or in the tens of thousands of upscale restaurants and hotels that started catering to a growing middle class. Almost overnight, “English” coaching classes sprung up all over India. Today, even maids and drivers try their best to ensure that their children attend a “convent” school where English is the medium of instruction. But in the process, millions of young Indians from Hindi heartland states found themselves cut off from a booming world of new job opportunities. The lucky ones who had learnt English earned Rs 30,000 a month at call centers. Their friends who failed to learn even basic English became security guards earning maybe Rs 6,000 a month.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>The plight of the IIT Roorkee students is no different. Look at the irony of it. A student gets 92 per cent&nbsp;in English in the state board exams. But once inside a class room at IIT Roorkee, he can’t even understand what is being spoken. The author doesn’t agree with language chauvinists who insist that primacy must be given only to the “mother” tongue. They always point out Germany, France, China, Japan and South Korea to show these countries have done exceedingly well without English. Well, the fact is that there is just one language that is overwhelmingly dominant in these countries. In India, there are more than 30 “dominant” languages. Hindi was tried as a “national” language. Mercifully that imposition failed; and it is Bollywood movies that have done more to spread Hindi than chauvinistic north Indian politicians and activists. To be sure, take pride in your mother tongue and ensure it is taught well in schools. But please also ensure English is taught, and taught well in schools. It is nice to talk about Skill India and the demographic dividend. But without English, that will remain hogwash and a pipe dream.&nbsp;</div><div>&nbsp;</div>