 So I think we've touched upon most of what I wanted to ask regarding vocational training regarding how it's going to affect the socially marginalized communities. So can you, but on ground when it's implemented, what kind of repercussions would it have? You said about commercializing education, can you elaborate a bit more? Yes, see that ABC is the best, it is the tool. Say what will happen, the ABC allows the students, the learners to take courses across institutions, across states and as an extended version across the seas in different countries. That is the fundamental idea of internationalizing education. So what will happen, say let us take first domestically and then we talk about international service. So in this country, if you charge per course instead of per year or a semester, what will happen? Who is going to regulate the fees? Even today, the regulation of fees in different states are as decided by the market force. I mean the private educators and they are part of the game and government has some representatives they discuss, they decide the fees. And like Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, many states are following that. But per course, how will you charge? There are millions of courses which demand, some courses demand more practice based and which incurs a lot of materials and cost and some courses not. And then millions of courses are there, not just thousands and thousands of domains are there. How are you going to decide the cost of the studies per course and who is going to fix it? So eventually it will be left to the educators, I mean the institutions. Mostly now the private institutions are dominant and they have already taken a chunk of enrollment from the public institutions to the private. Like I don't want to name any institutions, you know in Tamil Nadu, even in other states, dominant players are private institutions, you know what it is. And they have the market power and they have marketing muscles. Through that they will reach out the students, attract the students, brainwash them and they are going to pay huge fees for per course. And eventually it is going to become a multi-trillion, maybe multi-billion dollar industry. So it is commercialization, it is commercialization, centralization and it is communalization. So in that way the ABC has another fallacy is that say it can be done only through online and if it is only online is practically feasible, then the cost involved in online who is going to bear. And most of the students who cannot get high-band connectivities cannot get these courses. And the accessibility in taking the courses in top-notch institutions is another problem. But beyond that the cost involved through online is another impairment. And they are going to pay per course and they are going to incur cost on the connectivities and other resources involved. And it is a commercialization anyway. It's a full known commercialization. Normally most of the people cannot afford. The other consequences, the repercussions you said about the skills and the knowledge as required by the 21st century, what is that? The 21st century skills are not the traditional skills and knowledge that we in contemporary times we groom our kids. See the issue is the consciousness, the human consciousness and the judgmental capacities and their emotional intelligence matters more in 21st century than the operational skills being taught now. So that means we are looking for new competence, new skills, new knowledge. You think that these online ABC and all these value-based education is going to impart this? Cannot. Because unless it is left to the educators, I mean the academic councils, the experts really doing education service, it cannot be done. So that means that the major flaws in this process is we are going to be highly backward and highly uncompetitive in the 21st century and this is going to affect the economy and livelihood. Another issue is when you will have a livelihood increased or improved only when you are productive with your knowledge as a part of, as a unit of your society, you have to be productive, knowledge productivity only takes you to identify new avenues and do new experiments to create your livelihood, new livelihood opportunities because the production and means of production in the 21st century is taking us to define new occupations and new livelihood opportunities. For that education should be open-ended and it should give, it should be more democratic in nature. It should give more room for us to explore more and more our human endeavors. Say as a society I have a learning curve and I have a lot of experiences and drawn from thousands of years of the human activities I cherished and if I just lose all these things and follow the standardized knowledge and skills imposed on me and I am losing all my opportunities to increase or improve my livelihood. So livelihood gives occupations, occupations gives jobs. So these are the connectivities. So knowledge productivity once it is stopped, the society will not be able to increase or improve its livelihood and identify new opportunities for livelihoods and eventually there will be no jobs. So this standardized curriculum is going to directly hit the human evolution in this country and economic activities will be very much pulled back and eventually the country is heading towards the chaos both economically and socially. So I understand that to some extent it has internationalized the frameworks for higher education in the country. So isn't that good? Wouldn't it increase the standards? See as I always used to say that education is contextual, regional, situational. And one practice in some regions, one best practice of some regions cannot fit into some other regions. So in this way you cannot cut and paste any best practice. The best practice maybe it is best to European countries or to some other countries where they have experimented for several years. But if you just cut and copy here it would not work out because the say for instance in the United States the education is liberalized. They follow the pattern of liberal education. And they know how to, what is the limit and what is the dose up to which they can increase or reduce that liberal, you know, inquisitions in studies. Whereas in India, if you apply the same liberal education philosophies here, people will be construing them as something with respect to their own wisdom and with respect to their hidden agenda. So that danger is there. So that means if this is left to the society, it is better. So that means that you cannot copy the code to the best practices being followed elsewhere in any part of the world and justify that people are doing there. Why not we do it here? That cannot happen because one, even in European Union there are 48 countries subscribed to the framework. But they even 50% of them did not implement it till now after 20 years. So that means that it is not possible to standardize a system even within their own region. How do you copy those things? You look at the academic knowledge and skills that they have. They have segregated academic and generic. You look at that educational or academic skills and knowledge in our framework. It is something like, it's a cotton paste of European, you know, they call it as descriptors. And these descriptors, they elaborate it. Whereas in European Union, it is very generic and they have copied it and elaborated it and they have standardized more. So more standardization leads to less innovation. So that means that you cannot copy internationalization. And the internationalization, one of the reason is that India has subscribed to God's agreement in the year 2005. They opened up the higher education market 2005. But till now, no universities are able to come to India and establish their universities. Why? Because there was no law passed so far till now in the parliament allowing the foreign educators to establish institutions here. But one of the aspects of the God's agreement is, you know, exporting educational services across the without establishing institutions in the concerned country. So that means without their physical presence in India, they can export their services. How can they do it? You have to have ABC. They can easily export the service. And they have to meet the, they have to comply with the God's agreement. The World Trade Organization is pressing the government of India. You have signed in 2005 and you also have benefited from our trade agreements on many other aspects. Why don't you allow us to enter into education? That is the compulsion they have. And they could not directly allow them to establish the service here. So indirectly, they want to have a framework like this so that they can deliver the services having their presence there. So these are the consequences of internationalizing the curriculum through this framework. So we have a particular government party ruling in the center and they have particular ideology which is totalitarian, Hindu-majoritarian ideology. Does that get reflected in this framework? That is what. Actually, I have to go a little bit detail. Actually, when a nation state, the concept of nation state is about maybe 200 years old. And primarily the nation states, those who are in governance, took education as a public cause. And they were held responsible just 150 to 100 years ago to cater education. Only then people will be able to democratically, uniformly or equally get access to education. So that was the primary purpose that education was taken. The responsibility of education was taken by the governments. But now it has turned into a kind of tool that the nation state take education as a platform, as an instrument, to create citizens of pervicious and aspirations. So that is now getting reflected in the current right-wing government. That government is known for its own ideals, the Hindutva and Hindurastra and majoritarian approaches. These are all the symptoms of this government. This government cannot establish law. It is unconstitutional. If they implement the majoritarian approaches, the constitution will prevent them from doing so. So the only option is penetrating into the society and how to do it through a socio-cultural moment. And they are already doing it. They have their sister's organizations doing it. But since they are in the government, education is the best platform for them to implement and inculcate their ideals of majoritarian ideals so that they can create uniform citizens which are obedient to the nation state. Mostly you look at Mussolini or Hitler anybody and they also wish to create a kind of a nation state, a majoritarian nation state in their own countries. When they did so, they used education as the main tool. They did not use weapons and they did not use any laws and legislations because they could not make such kind of laws and legislations because their constitution also did not allow them to do so. So the only way, informal way, which does not require any laws and legislations is education because education is more informal in nature where you can easily inject your ideals and also students there from third standard to the age of 29 until the students study, until they complete their youth hood and they want to take over the youths and create a new citizen, a kind of a citizen. So that means that it is purely a plot, it's purely a plot to create a kind of a citizen citizenry that would further these government's wishes and long term goals. That's why they created the frame. This is enough. This is one great weapon enough for them to achieve their goals. You are saying any education framework should ensure that a student can study fail as well as succeed given another opportunity, but this framework does not have that. So what kind of repercussion would that have? See, not only this framework, you look at the early childhood learning that they are going to introduce in school education. Right from third standard onwards, they are going to have a kind of a so called public examinations like that, third standard, fifth standard, eighth. And from ninth onwards, the secondary school starts from ninth onwards, they have said they are going to implement semester based system. That means from ninth to 12, four years, eight semesters and eight public examinations. So eight plus these three about 11 public examinations in 12 years time frame students are going to take. Imagine the hardship involved and the filtration involved. The government doesn't want more graduates. They want more workforce, operators. Okay, no problem. Any country you go, there are more operators and now more workforces. That will be less, you know, graduates. But it should not be implemented in a segregated fashion, isn't it? The haves will have degrees. The have nots will be workforce. The haves will have honors degree, research based degrees. The have nots will not have. This is the partiality it is going to do. So the filtration starts from third standard onwards, third standard onwards. And then it continues up to the entry exit, multiple entry exit systems they are planning to have. So in this multiple exit systems, what is going to happen is that the multiple exit means it is not optional for the students. That is one side. They can also opt if they have no money or if they have any personal problems, they can just opt to leave out and then enter back. That is optional. But it is forcefully also sending the students out. If you fail, then you have to be retained, detained at that milestone and you have to get through it to pursue the studies until then you are stopped there. So that means there is a forceful exit also is involved in this framework. If that happens, what will happen? So that means that this system, this framework thinks that when a student fails, that is an end to him. He should not succeed. So education should primarily give opportunities to students to fail. I am not asking students, all students to fail. If they succeed in the first stroke, welcome. But in case if they fail, they should be given an opportunity to improve and succeed. So that is the very fundamental idea of education, the philosophy of education. Because failure means to them mark, if they score less mark, it is failure. Does it mean that they have less, they are less knowledgeable and skillful? Are they testing the other skills and all around learning abilities, learned abilities of the students by one single examination? Not, practically not. So you cannot consider a student just because he scored low or failed in the mark. You cannot just kick him out because he learned and he has skills and he also has knowledge, but only in this test he failed. You should give him an opportunity to pursue, learn more and exhibit his talents and abilities more. So all over the world, this is the philosophy. But in this country, never ever in the world in the history, you will see a framework sending the students and showing the exit door just because he failed. In that case, what will happen, that majority of the students is going to increase the dropout rates among the rural students and majority schedule class, backward class students, they are going to face a very big problem. That means that it is going to discourage the higher education and detain them and stop them from pursuing higher education. So you said during the drafting period, a lot of stakeholders were not taken into this process. The states were not considered a diverse set of educationals were not taken into the fold. What about the implementation? Would that also not be in a diversified manner? Would that also be in a very narrow focus? No, actually any educational interventions or initiatives aiming for good human potential should look into the diverse requirements of these societies, regions and stakeholders, which are very diverse in nature, it is known all over the world. Especially in a country like India, where the society is highly diverse in terms of culture, in terms of social values and systems and language and also the demographic conditions also are so much different. We compare Tamil Nadu with Bihar, the demographic conditions are very much opposite in nature. So in this case, suitably the educational interventions and initiatives should be devised in such a fashion so that it meets that requirements of that context. So whereas what happened that they are trying to standardize it, centralize it, make it uniform so that there is no scope for innovations or there is no scope for any tweaking or fine-tuning the system to meet the requirements of that particular region, of that particular society. So it is not at all possible. But the other question is, in addition to this, it is known historically and scientifically it is proved diversity leads to knowledge productivity. So you take Weygotsky and other major philosophers, they said that as long as more diverse groups are involved social units are involved in learning, it increases the knowledge or the understanding. So that means that the mental development of the child increases when it is exposed to diverse learning. So that means various social units, members from various social units are collectively when they are studying and that improves, gives an opportunity for the students to improve their innovations of creativity and mental ability that they call like something called the proximate development, the proximate mental development. So that means that diversity is very much important even for research and knowledge productivity. It is known. So this is trying to kill anyway. But they are saying that we have the power to do it. Do they have constitutional power and mandate to do so? Even constitutionally, they have no power and authority to do so. The reason is, in the list one, the entry 66 empowers the national state, I mean the national government to set standards and coordinate the things. So it is just a coordination and determination of standards. That's it. You cannot come and regulate it because this is 100% regulation. A common curriculum framework is a regulation. It is not just setting the standards. Part of it is standard. You can set it as long as it is generic and where all stakeholders are involved. And if it is open-ended, you can set that kind of a standard. Or you can set a standard like this is the number of credit, volume of credit for this particular course. You can set that. But you should not go into detail and create the descriptors saying that this is what you should learn. So this is a blatant violation of the constitution because the entry 32 in the state list empowers the state governments only to establish and regulate wind-up higher education institutions, not the center. So that means the federal, the union government cannot regulate the curriculum or the educational process. Only states have the power. So constitutionally also this is against the framework is against the constitution. They might say they have a scope in the concurrent list. But concurrent list is subject to entry 32 and entry 66. Entry 66 is the central list. Entry 32 is state list. So the concurrent list is subject to both. That means it must comply with both constitutional provisions. So in that manner, even in the concurrent list, they cannot use concurrent list as a premise to implement this framework. So you have said that this is not taking into the states along with the center. The state list and the center list are not both given the chance that they have to be given. So does it mean that this framework goes by the one nation, one language, one religion and one education policy, one education framework in that manner as if headed towards that? Yeah, this is the extended consistent activities that the union government plans to implement in India. So they have been following several laws and amending a lot of legislations and initiatives they have taken to make the oneness in this country in terms of society, culture, even the religious aspects are also involved. So they are trying to say that we are one country, one nation, so education should also be one. But the problem is we are of different nations. That is the problem. We are all of different nations because we have a different thought process going on in different regions. That's what I say that it is a notional nation. I call it as notional nation. Maybe it's a terminology, but it is nothing but that it's the collective consciousness of certain group of people or a society in a given region in the country. That represents their wishes, their consciousness and their culture and their value systems. And that is what I call notional nation. So that means that the nation, the constitutional nation which is driven by the constitution should limit its activities and initiatives within the purview of the constitution. It should not go into beyond that and create a kind of a society because the constitution doesn't allow the nation state to do so. So that means that this country has a different caste hierarchical systems and different communities and different cultures and lives and which is undemocratic because it is hierarchically placed. So in a given undemocratic society, the education should play a democratic role in extending its service, bypassing or demolishing the undemocratic system. The situations and conditions prevailing in this country. So that means that education and democracy both are related in such a way that more and more open-ended, free and democratic educational process you have, more and more democratization of the society will be happening because we are unequal and we are undemocratic. So the society itself is not able to recline its weaknesses, its unequal and undemocratic weaknesses itself for the past several thousand years. So that means that education at least should do its minimal role in attempting to incorporate all the diverse views of the society, the requirements of the society into its curriculum, into its educational service process. So that it will at least over a period of time will try to recline over a period of time the undemocratic or unequal conditions of the society. So that is the kind of educational policy, philosophy and system we need in this country. Certainly the country ruled by this current government with these frameworks and the national education policy 2020, in total it is trying to put its own majoritarian agenda into it and it is not taking into account the ground reality. So that means that it is against the people of the country, it is against the society and it is against the nation itself. So in that way this must be thrown out. Thank you. Thanks.