Widespread criticism of the changes notified recently by the Union Public Service Commission involving the language component in the Civil Services examination has forced the Union government to put those plans on hold pending review. The “language bias” allegation that has been made by almost all the detractors is centred on the perception that English has been given a more prominent place in the scheme of things compared to regional languages, including Hindi. Some of them point out that a paper that carries 100 marks in English comprehension and précis will now affect the merit ranking of candidates where earlier her or his facility in English was tested only at the qualifying stage. This, it is argued, favours urban, English-medium educated candidates, at the cost of those from rural and disadvantaged backgrounds. Other controversial changes, though predictably less of a red rag for our usual English-baiters, involve the subtle downgrading of India’s regional languages in the UPSC exam. For example, students who study in any language other than English or Hindi will no longer be able to write a crucial paper in that language unless their undergraduate degree also happened to be in that medium of instruction.
The thrust since Independence has been on giving the Indian Administrative Service and allied cadres the stamp of an inclusive and representative stream, effacing the elitism that was the predominant feature of the Indian Civil Service that preceded it. It is this rationale that led to a selection process where candidates belonging to poorer and deprived classes or from hitherto under-represented regions are also able to make their mark. This approach is crucial to ensuring that officers who lead the bureaucracy have the right orientation to give primacy to the principles of equity in decision-making. Any debate that posits the “language bias” argument to downplay the need for verbal and written fluency in English is fraught with danger. In today’s India, administrators have to be able to communicate effectively in English. To that extent, the UPSC exam must ensure that a successful candidate has a minimum level of proficiency in the language. That said, using English as a merit-ranking device may not produce an optimum outcome. While candidates who study in English-medium schools are likely to know the language better than others, there is no reason to assume their overall knowledge base or skill set is better than those who have studied in other languages. Allowing candidates to answer a common set of questions in the language they are most comfortable in is the best way to assess their suitability. Of course, the post-entrance training process can and must be used to improve standards of English.
The changed syllabus by upsc may result in selecting prominent candidates.In fact it may not good for rural background candidates.someone whose background is english he may crack civils.At the same time whose background is B.com or any native language pursued candidate may get tough competition from english back grounded.equal opportunity will be given to all.but the new pattern is good compared to old.sophisticated persons are required for civil service.But modification is neccessary to make equitable.
1. The argument of the author that English skill is tested in the preliminary stage itself is wrong, as only a few multiple choice questions are there to be answered. It should not be forgotten that except for the IAS and IPS stream, most are All India Service posts. A person from Bihar may choose IRS cadre and may get posted in Bihar. Effective communication is possible only if they are able to communicate in a common language. Should that common language be made Hindi, putting the students from South India at back foot. How can vernacular language be tested when no one can predict the region of posting? A good beauraucrat should be perfect in file notings he make, thus art of precise writing is key. When a person can clear degree exam in English,why complain now that they are not fluent in the language. A good move of UPSC nipped in the bud by regional chauvinists. However, the option to write in Hindi should be in same lines as writing in vernacular language.
UPSC exams are the country's topmost exams. The present move of UPSC in changing the modality in giving preference to English language and relegating the other state oriented languages is derogatory. No doubt, prominence has to be given to English for universal communication but not at the cost of thousands who do and had their primary education in their mother tongue or state language and were excelling in their professions. Change in pattern should be debated at national level at appropriate forums and consensus has to be arrived at taking into account the views of all stakeholders. Brilliance and proficiency can not be measured by English alone and especially should not be at the cost of an individual's RTE.
The latest changes introduced by UPSC to give weightage to English and few other changes seems to be fair enough to make the exam pattern a level-playing feild, but the attempt back fired badly, I feel, because of the large gap between Urban private education system and rural private/govt education system. Giving priority to English profiency and not allowing students to write in vernacular languages if their medium in Graduation is English will have adverse impact on Engineering students as no college in India offers Engineering course in vernacular languages.
UPSC changes can be introduced only when there is a balace in urban and rural education system, where every students is provided opportunity from primary school level to gain good proficiency of English, even if his/her medium of instruction is not English
If the constitution of India itself is written in English and then why
do certain sections of people over-hyping the issue. Though regional
languages need to be preserved but there should also be a debate in
parliament regarding the introduction of English from Nursery level
and Computer& IT in every school(rural and urban)along with the
regional languages of the states. Only a uniformity of education will
ensure unbiased results in such exams. However we should not forget
the point that we live in 21st century and English a global language
for communication and today IT revolution has its effects on E-
Governance and a whole lot of issues. Language has always been a
serious issue in India since independence but we cannot isolate
ourselves at this time. This is high time the Government should
implement these things in schools as well as in Colleges/Universities.
English is the language of communication between North and South
Indians. Therefore it should be the Lingua Franca of India.
I fully agree with the points made by the editor. However, I would
like to add a couple of points. In addition to testing the minimum
proficiency required in English as suggested, the candidates
proficiency in Hindi and other vernacular language of choice should
also be tested, because, if English, being the international
business language, connects the administrator with the entire
world, the local languages connect him with the general public who
may not be so good at English. All this, of course, should be at
the qualifying stage itself. Further, no single component of the
overall examination process, be it test of English or any other
one, should be given so much weightage that it would tilt the
scales too much in favour of some and place the other at extreme
disadvantage.
In an age where the whole internet is rendered in English, the
prospect is definitely biased towards vernacular medium students. But
everybody seems to be overlooking the main point. Although skill sets
and knowledge lay the groundwork for Administrative services, more
important is the conduct and ethics of the candidates that need to
assessed correctly. There is no lack of talent in IAS officers, but
there is a dearth of commitment and an urge to do social good. Their
ethics falter in testing times. Throughout the training of IAS
officers more emphasis should be laid towards responsibilities and its
consequences in case of failures rather than the powers and perks that
entail IAS. As far as English language is concerned, if the govt is
very keen to bring it in, sufficient time should be given to
candidates to prepare themselves for it. For eg. it can make the
announcement now for candidates who would be appearing 5 years down
the line.
As usual wisdom takes a backseat while emotions drive. We need IAS for
governance and running a government.We need skills to understand the
intricacies of various departments and communicating with World at
large to gain advantage for our country. From these angles it is better
to have only Hindi and English as lanuages for IAS entry examinations.
Government if it should encourage other languages there are umpteen
other venues.But to mix up job opportunities with governance is
incorrect. There is a looming danger that by adopting all languages for
Civil services,objective selection will be replaced by parochial
subjective selection, which would endanger our integrity. In fact we
are witness to the decline in administration from a time when English
was the sole language for selection to the existing Two language for
selection. I am aware that mine is a very weak voice, but having served
in Centre for more than 35 years,it is an experienced voice. My plea is
let wisdom prevail.
English should not affect selection but post-selection training process
must be used to improve standards of English.
This has certainly turned into a full blown controversy now. One of
the many reasons i can think of as to why UPSC took this decision is
to ease logistical hurdles, that otherwise would have required
hundreds of evaluators across different languages to evaluate the
answer scripts of thousands of candidates. UPSC is a constitutional
body, it holds its own exalted position in the Country's framework.
That said, they wouldn't have taken this decision without considering
the myriad challenges and controversies that are surfacing now.
But, now that politics has come into play, on the lines of language.
There is little hope for any reform which would otherwise have
benefited the country itself in selecting capable officers to serve
her.
I have two observations.
You write, "... compared to regional languages, including Hindi." As Hindi is listed in the Eighth Schedule, why did you deem it necessary to say, "including Hindi"? The second observation is, you let go an opportunity to stress that there is no legal backing to denote any language as National Language. This status appears to have been conferred upon Hindi merely by dint of repeated, yet illegal mention, mostly by Hindi zealots. If the language issue as pertaining to UPSC examinations is to be discussed, it must be acknowledged clearly that Hindi and English are official languages, India has NO National Language!
Raghuram Ekambaram
This discussion once again brings to the focus against declaring any regional language
including Hindi as the official language at the center. English alone should be the official
language which will balance out all the advantages or disadvantages to all the regions on an
equal footing. Rural/urban or convent/government school debate should be corrected with
proper educational policies by the state governments.
I am in agreement with your views. From my little interaction with
today’s youth who have studied in English medium I notice a tendency
to think that some proficiency in English is what is needed, other
languages are of little relevance. But when one observes that there is
very little enthusiasm to acquire good communication and writing
skills in regional languages, one wonders what is in store for those
who are with average IQ and cannot acquire some proficiency even in
their mother tongue.
I have two suggestions. First is that in Hindi speaking states, the
State governments should encourage study of a regional language from
the South and students with good knowledge of a language other than
mother tongue should be given some preference in UPSC selections for
all India postings. My other suggestion is that UPSC bias towards
Hindi should be done away with so that students from non-Hindi regions
do not face any unfair competition from students whose mother tongue
is Hindi. br/>
Hindiwallas do not understand or do not want to understand that India
is a country with over 20 languages, which are quite substantial and
ancient.Even if Hindi( including Maithili,Bhojpuri as Hindi) may be in
larger in number, the population of non-Hindi speakers is huge.
Punjab,Maharashtra ,Rajasthan etc may understand Hindi but they are
not part of the Hindi lingua.. Hindi cannot keep the country
together.While English may appear to be dividing poor and the middle
class, it is the only language which can ferment unity.Regional
differences disappear when all the people learn English. Except in
some states, even the poor seem to think they will have a better
future with English. As rightly pointed in the Editorial, even if
local,vernaculars are given the first choice for entry into the IAS,
eventually post entry training should concentrate on English in the
current globalised atmosphere in the world.
Sir,
When millions of Indians do not know to read and wright, much stress on English is harmful. The stress on English in UPSC exams and other like exams, such as RRB, BSRB, etc. has been keeping millions of rural background youngsters away from the portals of these reputed public sector institutions. Thus these institutions are dominated by the persons from upper strata of society. Inspite of long independent India, the youth from rural areas do not find place (I mean sufficient) in these institutions. Hope this discussion will throw light in right perspective and erase this discrimination.
Rightly said in the article that candidates from Urban English Medium
schools may be good in English and their accent but we the Rural
Regional Language Govt School candidates are better than them in the
areas of Knowledge, Skills, Decision making etc....Many organisations
reject candidates just by knowing that they are from Govt schools
without realizing that they are also eligible and able to make the
change.
I think what upsc is trying to correct is the perceived favoritism
given to candidates who are writing their exam in the regional
languages. The person evaluating a paper written in a regional
language will in all probability be from the same region and there
is a chance of evaluator being liberal. However the corrective
action taken by upsc does throw up the genuine issue of dis
advantaged candidates from rural areas being further disadvantaged.
Catch 22 for upsc
English in the present day set up in Lingua Franca and it should be given its prominence if India is to prosper as well.
Please Email the Editor