“As long as all the people with the best jobs in the government and in large corporations expect to operate in English, aspiring parents will want to have an English-medium education for their children.”
Robert Le Page, veteran socio-linguist, said this in a work in 1997. He was a pioneer in Creole studies, but it might well apply to Karnataka.
On Wednesday, the High Court of Karnataka said the State government cannot refuse to accept application from an educational institution that wishes to start English medium primary classes. It cited the Supreme Court judgment of May that struck down the government’s policy making Kannada/mother tongue the compulsory medium of instruction till Class 5. This 20-year-old policy has been entangled in legal battles, with private school managements fighting it tooth and nail.
In an attempt to buy time, Karnataka is filing a curative petition on the Supreme Court order. Successive governments, for the fear of being dubbed anti-mother tongue, have refused to accept they are fighting what is increasingly a losing battle to save its language policy. The reality is that the job market in a globalising economy since the 1990s has placed a premium on knowledge of English, even as jobs in government-run sectors have shrunk enormously.
No wonder then that the poorest of poor, especially in cities, are shifting to English education even when it is beyond their means. Socially disadvantaged groups, including Dalit organisations, have asked why they should be deprived of English education, a means of upward mobility. Though there is no proof yet that English is the definitive equaliser overriding factors of caste, class and gender, private schools have mushroomed and their managements grown into a rich and powerful lobby riding on this demand, defying the official language policy.
The Karnataka government tried to strike a middle path by introducing English as a subject from Class 1. But in the absence of a concerted effort and infrastructure to make it work on the ground, there is no sign of these weaning parents away from English schools. Can language policy look one way when the political economy is looking the other?
