EducationPolicy – NCERT Scholar Defends Withdrawn Judiciary Chapter Amid Supreme Court Debate
EducationPolicy – Michel Danino, a senior academic associated with the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), has defended the contents of a withdrawn Class 8 social science chapter that sparked a legal and academic controversy earlier this year. Danino stated that he never anticipated the section on the judiciary would become the center of such intense public debate and maintained that the material was factually accurate.
Danino, a Padma Shri recipient and noted scholar, had headed the curricular group responsible for preparing social science textbooks for NCERT. Along with fellow academics Suparna Diwakar and Alok Prasanna Kumar, he came under scrutiny after objections were raised over a subsection discussing the judiciary’s role in society.
Supreme Court Order and Professional Fallout
The controversy escalated after the Supreme Court, in its March 11 order, directed that the three academicians be disassociated from educational assignments linked to government-funded institutions. However, the court later revised the order, allowing the Centre, states, Union territories, and public institutions to independently decide on any future association with them.
Speaking about the consequences of the initial ruling, Danino revealed that his guest professor contract at the Indian Institute of Technology-Gandhinagar was immediately cancelled.
According to him, the institution ended the arrangement without any prior discussion. He also claimed the institute publicly distanced itself from him soon after the court order became public.
Concerns Over NCERT’s Response
Danino expressed disappointment with the way NCERT handled the matter before the court. He argued that the process behind textbook preparation was not properly explained during the proceedings.
He clarified that the chapter was not written solely by NCERT officials but had gone through broader review mechanisms involving the Teaching Learning Material Committee and the NCF Oversight Committee.
Danino said the committee members believed that if they had been given an opportunity to directly explain the educational context behind the chapter, the March ruling might have been avoided.
Academics Defend the Content
Although the Supreme Court described portions of the chapter as “wholly undesirable,” Danino said the academics respectfully disagreed with that assessment in affidavits submitted earlier this year.
He acknowledged that certain phrases or headings might have been better framed but insisted that the overall substance of the chapter was not objectionable. According to him, the material was developed using reliable and authentic references and was never intended to undermine the judiciary.
Danino emphasized that debates around social science textbooks are not new in India. He pointed out that controversies involving educational content have appeared repeatedly since the 1970s under governments led by different political parties.
Focus on Critical Thinking in Education
The scholar explained that the now-removed chapter was designed to encourage analytical thinking among students and align with the broader goals of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and the National Curriculum Framework for School Education 2023.
He said the educational vision behind the curriculum reforms was to introduce students to practical issues affecting institutions and society from an early stage, particularly from Grade 6 onward.
Danino also stressed that the judiciary was not singled out in the textbook. Similar discussions concerning Parliament and other democratic institutions were also included as part of broader civic learning.
Debate Over Real-World Issues in Classrooms
Defending the inclusion of institutional challenges in school education, Danino argued that shielding students from real-world discussions would go against the objectives of the new education policy.
He maintained that students at an appropriate age should be encouraged to engage with contemporary issues in a mature and balanced manner. According to him, such discussions help young people become informed and responsible citizens capable of contributing positively to society in the future.
Danino added that understanding institutional weaknesses is essential for improvement and reform. He said meaningful progress can only happen when shortcomings are openly acknowledged and discussed within democratic spaces, including classrooms.