The Supreme Court of India came down heavily on the NCERT for having a chapter mentioning "judicial corruption" in a social science textbook of Class 8. In response, the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) issued a public apology on Tuesday (March 10). It has also announced that the entire book has been withdrawn and is no longer available.
The entire row has set off a nationwide media debate — not just about the content of the chapter, but also about how that chapter was able to go through NCERT’s academic review process. The issue also raises questions about the effectiveness of systems in place for ensuring factual, balanced, and culturally appropriate content in education materials.
Gaps in Education Content Review
NCERT books provide learning foundations for millions of students throughout India. Due to the significant impact this resource plays in the lives of Indian children, the materials must be subjected to rigorous and multi-layered review processes before publication.
Gitesh Gupta, CEO of Aimlay, said "Academic reviews must not only ensure that facts are correct but also take into consideration tone, context, pedagogical suitability, and how these factors could affect institutions providing democracy. Balanced presentations of sensitive topics that promote critical thoughts should be developed utilising a more diverse group of educators, subject matter experts, legal academics, and independent academics. A revised review process should contribute to improving credibility and providing fewer opportunities to reactively correct the published work."
A Broader Concern
Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and universities can only determine whether doctoral theses, published journal articles, and faculty research are credible through unbiased academic reviews. Many questions have been raised on the issues of inconsistency in conducting peer reviews, inability to thoroughly verify journal articles and the excessive number of poor-quality publications, all of which demonstrate a serious structural flaw.
"HEIs need to establish effective quality assurance systems. This includes improving the number of resources spent on plagiarism detection; enforcing ethical guidelines for conducting research; establishing a system to conduct blind peer reviews; and creating independent academic oversight committees. The development of a stronger level of academic oversight will not only create a higher level of quality within HEIs but will also create an environment to encourage innovation and meaningful contributions to academia," Gitesh Gupta said.
Importance of Structured Academic Support
While institutional reform is necessary, quality assurance starts at the level of the learner as well. Many learners and scholars experience great difficulty due to a lack of structured mentoring, clarity on methodology and general support, thus leading to poor-quality research being produced. Research that is produced may not meet expectations, even when it was well thought-out and supported by academic mentors.
"To develop a stronger academic ecosystem, it is crucial to have structured mentoring platforms that guide the learner from the time they begin the process of proposal development, literature review, developing their research design, and ethics compliance. By using such mentoring systems, scholars can refine their work prior to it being formally evaluated, which reduces the burden on institutional review boards, while at the same time increasing the quality of academic work produced," Gitesh Gupta said.
Transparent and Inclusive Review Framework
A clearly defined set of standards, the participation of multi-disciplinary experts, and the use of written evaluation criteria to ensure transparency and inclusiveness in academic review processes should form the foundation for developing an academically sound review framework.
Schools should seek balance in their textbook content analysis by using multi-disciplinary teams. Research institutions need to develop stronger peer-review processes, ethical guidelines, and research quality standards consistent with worldwide expectations. Periodic independent audits can further increase the credibility of the institution’s research. Mentoring and academic assistance will also provide opportunities for scholars to develop their work in advance of formal evaluation. These modifications will lead to an increase in quality assurance by being proactive rather than reactive.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone. The opinions and facts in this article do not represent the stand of Edexlive.
