Indian and foreign: On the CBSE and third language
The controversy over introducing a third language from Class 6 stems from an unresolved contradiction in the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 . At several places, the NEP, rightly, extols the special importance of English, especially in mathematics, science and even legal education, and does not club it with other “foreign” languages such as French or Spanish. At the same time, it advocates the three-language formula, with two languages required to be native to India, one of them ideally the mother tongue, in effect relegating English to the status of a foreign language. The Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) has implemented this aspect of the NEP, ignoring other welcome observations that the policy makes on language learning. While introducing three languages from Class 6, it said students in Classes 7, 8 and 9 should also study three languages, of which two should be “Bharatiya”. Thus, if a student had taken French as a second language along with English, they would have had to forego French and switch to two Bharatiya languages, one of which would be entirely new to them. This could adversely affect their Class 10 Board examination performance, and render redundant the teaching capacity and resources schools had built in those languages. Following backlash, the CBSE has said that students in Classes 7, 8 and 9 need take only one additional Bharatiya language if they had taken English and, say, Spanish. The third language, moreover, will not be tested in the Class 10 examinations. These are, however, temporary arrangements and the CBSE is going ahead with the three language policy with two Bharatiya languages from Class 6. Prudence demands that if the NEP is to guide the Union government’s decisions, it should ensure language learning that serves the best interests of students. The policy speaks of the need for “high-quality bilingual textbooks and teaching-learning materials for science and mathematics, so that students are enabled to think and speak about the two subjects both in their home language/mother tongue and in English”. Here, the NEP places the mother tongue and English on an equal footing if STEM is to be central to India’s progress. In the same breath, it speaks of the importance of learning languages such as Japanese and German at the secondary level to enhance students’ “mobility”. The government’s vision is to skill Indians for cutting-edge jobs worldwide, building the human capital needed to drive India’s development. Instead of atavistic relapses, education initiatives should look ahead to serve at least this vision, even if that model is open to question. Given that the CBSE often becomes the template for much of India, the better course would be to teach the mother tongue and English and, where resources permit and students desire, offer a third language of their choice. Published - July 01, 2026 12:20 am IST Read Comments Copy link Email Facebook Twitter Telegram LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit READ LATER SEE ALL Remove Related Topics school / language / education / Spain / France / India / test/examination
- 1The three-language formula has its roots in the 1968 National Policy on Education, which sought to balance linguistic diversity with national integration. The NEP 2020, adopted under Article 29 and 30 of the Constitution — which protect linguistic and minority rights — continues this tradition. However, the NEP's simultaneously high valuation of English for STEM creates an internal tension that the CBSE's implementation has now made visible. The constitutional framework does not mandate the relegation of English but does require sensitivity to mother tongues.
- 2India's education policy debates mirror broader global tensions between linguistic nationalism and cosmopolitan skill-building. Countries like Singapore and Finland have navigated multilingualism by treating proficiency in global languages — particularly English — as an economic imperative rather than a cultural concession. The CBSE's three-language rule, if rigidly applied, risks disadvantaging Indian students in international academic and professional settings precisely when India is positioning itself as a knowledge economy under its G20 presidency commitments.
- 3The implementation of education policy through CBSE circulars without legislative backing raises questions under Articles 14 and 21A of the Constitution, which guarantee the right to education. Courts have held in cases such as Unni Krishnan v. State of AP (1993) that the right to education includes the right to a quality education, and sudden mid-stream policy changes that harm Board examination performance could be challenged as arbitrary. The temporary nature of the CBSE's concession also means future students face legal uncertainty.
- 4India's demographic dividend depends critically on the quality of human capital produced by its school system. With over 1.4 crore students enrolled in CBSE schools and the CBSE serving as a template for state boards, policy changes ripple through the entire secondary education ecosystem. The market for language learning — including private coaching and digital platforms — is estimated at over ₹10,000 crore annually. Imposing restrictive language mandates reduces students' ability to acquire competencies in languages like Mandarin, German, and Japanese, which are increasingly demanded by global employers.