CHENNAI: The proposed introduction of a three-language system in schools under the National Education Policy (NEP) has sparked debate in Tamil Nadu, with educationists and political leaders questioning its practicality and impact on students.
Under the policy, to be implemented from the 2026-27 academic year, students from Class 6 will be required to study three languages, in addition to the existing two-language system. Students will be allowed to choose any Indian language as the third option.
The framework, which was earlier limited to Classes 6 to 8, is now proposed to be extended up to Class 10.
Educationists say the plan may be difficult to implement on the ground. Speaking to DT Next, educationist Sathish said that offering multiple language choices within a single classroom could create serious logistical issues.
"If students opt for different languages, schools will have to appoint separate teachers for each, which is not practical," he said, adding that such a system could indirectly lead to Hindi becoming the default third language.
Another educationist, Jayaprakash Gandhi, flagged concerns over academic pressure.
He noted that students are already dealing with a heavy curriculum and exam-related stress, and introducing an additional language could further burden them. He also pointed out that advances in technology now allow communication across languages without the need for formal learning.
All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam former School Education Minister S Vaigai Selvan said that Hindi is already compulsory in Navodaya schools for Classes 9 to 12.
He reiterated that the AIADMK supports the two-language policy and would oppose any attempt to impose a three-language system, even if proposed by its ally, the BJP. He added that students interested in learning additional languages could do so outside the school system.
School Education Minister Anbil Mahesh Poyyamozhi had earlier highlighted similar concerns, stating that accommodating multiple language options in a single classroom would require additional teachers and infrastructure. He described the proposal, in its current form, as impractical.