SSLC third language grading decision draws flak

Dharwad: The state govt's decision to replace marks with grades for the SSLC third language has come under sharp criticism by experts, teachers and student organisations.The All-India Democratic Students Organisation (AIDSO), while welcoming the decision as an important step towards introducing a two-language policy, said the manner in which it has been implemented exposes several lacunae. The organisation also criticised the timing of the decision, stating that introducing such a major policy shift in the middle of the examination process, without consulting students, parents, or teachers, is undemocratic and academically unsound. "Policy changes of this magnitude must be discussed widely and implemented at the beginning of an academic year," it said.Highlighting the broader implications, AIDSO warned that such unilateral decisions could set a precedent for bypassing stakeholder consultation in education policy, potentially leading to more arbitrary and anti-student measures in the future.Retired Hindi teacher Mallikarjun Chikkmath said that removing marks for the third language (Hindi) and excluding it from the total score has effectively reduced the SSLC aggregate to 525, creating serious inconsistencies in the assessment system. He said Hindi should remain a third language and called for a review of the current decision, insisting that any reform must ensure fair evaluation and uphold the academic interests of students.Meanwhile, MLC SV Sankanur also expressed concern over the move, describing it as hasty and unscientific. He said the sudden shift from marks to grades for the third language, just days before the Hindi examination scheduled on March 31, has caused confusion among students.He emphasised that excluding the third language from percentage calculation could demotivate students and create uncertainty among language teachers. Stressing that India has long followed the three-language formula, he urged the government to carefully examine the academic and practical implications before making such changes, and to avoid politicising language policy.