The recent appeal made by the Dimapur Naga Students’ Union against the compulsory introduction of Sanskrit in CBSE schools across Nagaland deserves serious attention and appreciation.
Share
A. Anato Swu
The recent appeal made by the Dimapur Naga Students’ Union (DNSU) against the compulsory introduction of Sanskrit in CBSE schools across Nagaland deserves serious attention and appreciation. At a time when many remain silent on issues affecting the future of students, the DNSU executives have courageously raised a matter that directly concerns the academic welfare, emotional well-being, and educational rights of Naga students. Their intervention reflects responsibility, foresight, and genuine concern for the younger generation.
As someone who has personally experienced similar educational difficulties during my high school days at Kendriya Vidyalaya Satakha under the 111 Battalion BSF, I can deeply relate to the concerns being voiced today. I still remember the time when we were informed that the subject of History would henceforth be taught in Hindi. At that stage, many of us were already struggling to cope with other subjects taught in English, which itself was not our mother tongue. For tribal students coming from rural and vernacular backgrounds, education was already a difficult mountain to climb.
Learning the alphabet — ABC and 123 — was itself a challenge for many first-generation learners among our people. English was foreign to us, yet we worked tirelessly to adapt because we understood its importance in modern education and communication. Alongside English, we were also expected to study Hindi, which many Naga students already find difficult due to linguistic and cultural differences. In such a context, introducing another unfamiliar classical language like Sanskrit as a compulsory subject appears not only impractical but insensitive to the realities faced by tribal students.
Back then, we, along with one of our local teachers, approached the Commandant of 111 Battalion BSF and respectfully expressed our grievances regarding the decision to teach History in Hindi. Fortunately, our concerns were heard. Within a month, the directive was revoked, and History continued to be taught in English. That experience taught me an important lesson: when students and communities unite and raise their voices with sincerity and reason, corrective action is possible.
Today, history seems to be repeating itself in another form.
The issue here is not hatred toward any language. Sanskrit is undoubtedly one of the oldest and most respected classical languages in the world, with immense literary and cultural value. However, language learning must never be imposed without proper preparation, trained teachers, adequate support systems, and consideration of regional realities. Education should empower students, not burden them with unnecessary anxiety and confusion.
The DNSU has rightly highlighted several critical concerns: the shortage of trained Sanskrit teachers, lack of tuition or remedial support, absence of academic groundwork, and increasing mental pressure on students. These are genuine issues that cannot be ignored. Forcing students to study a language for which there are neither teachers nor resources will only widen educational inequality and discourage many learners.
Nagaland is home to diverse tribal communities with distinct languages, identities, and educational challenges. Policymakers must understand that one-size-fits-all educational directives may not work in regions with unique historical, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds. Before introducing major academic changes, there must be consultation with schools, parents, student unions, and education experts from the region itself.
One cannot help but ask: what is the larger objective behind making Sanskrit compulsory in schools where even Hindi remains difficult for many students to comprehend? Are we trying to strengthen education, or are we burdening already struggling students with additional pressure? Such decisions must be guided by practicality and inclusiveness rather than ideology or symbolism.
I strongly stand with the DNSU and commend its president, executive members, and all those involved for taking up this issue in the interest of the Naga student community. Their effort is not merely a protest; it is a defense of educational fairness and student welfare.
I also earnestly appeal to La. Ganesan to intervene with wisdom and urgency. The concerns raised by students and parents deserve immediate review. The compulsory implementation of Sanskrit in CBSE schools in Nagaland should be suspended until proper infrastructure, qualified teachers, and support mechanisms are established, and until meaningful consultations are held with stakeholders.
Education should build bridges, not barriers. It should nurture understanding, confidence, and growth — not confusion and fear. The future of Naga students must never become an experiment of imposed policies disconnected from ground realities.