The University Grants Commission (UGC) recently unveiled its proposed undergraduate mathematics curriculum for India, intending to align it with the ambitious National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. This new draft aimed to blend traditional Indian mathematical concepts, contemporary teaching methods, and interdisciplinary studies, even citing ancient texts like the ‘Narada Purana’ and ‘Bharatiya Bijaganit’. However, this seemingly progressive reform has instead sparked a significant uproar from the nation’s mathematics community.
An astonishing number of over 900 mathematicians, respected educators, and leading researchers, including 20 prestigious Padma awardees and several Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Prize recipients, have collectively signed a petition demanding the immediate withdrawal of this draft. They describe the curriculum as having ‘grave defects,’ cautioning that its implementation could severely undermine the quality of mathematics education and, consequently, all other fields reliant on it, such as science, engineering, and economics.
A curriculum steeped in heritage
A central tenet of the draft curriculum is its emphasis on India’s rich mathematical heritage. It proposes teaching students the history and evolution of Indian algebra, the application of classical formulas like the Paravartya Yojayet Sutra for polynomial division, and even ancient ritual timekeeping systems such as muhurtas, juxtaposed against Greenwich Mean Time. References to the geometry found in the Narada Purana, principles of Vedic mathematics, and ancient Indian astronomical concepts are prominently featured throughout the syllabus.
The UGC’s stated goal was to forge a curriculum that honored India’s legacy while remaining relevant to modern times. However, critics argue that this very blend, particularly due to significant omissions, ultimately makes the draft unsuitable for its intended purpose.
The petitioners’ case
In a direct and strongly worded statement addressed to UGC Chairperson Vineet Joshi on Thursday, the concerned petitioners insisted that the draft must be discarded and entirely redeveloped by a panel of accomplished mathematicians and experienced educators. Their core argument is that the present document overlooks fundamental subjects in favor of incorporating outdated or otherwise irrelevant material.
Among their primary concerns are:
- Core subjects like real analysis, linear algebra, and modern algebra are either insufficiently covered or hastily compressed into single semesters, preventing proper academic progression.
- Applied mathematics has been pushed aside, with essential topics like programming and numerical methods absent from the core curriculum. Statistics, too, is confined to a single course with no practical application, thereby hindering students’ ability to apply these skills in fields such as machine learning or artificial intelligence.
- The elective courses are poorly organized. For example, “Mathematics in Music” supposedly requires only Class 10 level knowledge, yet it features advanced topics such as Fourier analysis and Markov chains. Similarly, “Mathematics in Machine Learning” attempts to cram complex concepts into a mere 15 hours.
- Many interdisciplinary courses venture far beyond the typical expertise of most mathematics educators. The signatories argue that subjects connecting mathematics to meditation, drama, or various arts are entirely unsuitable for an undergraduate program.
The petition also critiques the inclusion of obsolete courses like Analytical Geometry and Mechanics, which are seen as relics of colonial-era curricula. Furthermore, it exposes perplexing citations of non-existent reference materials, noting that books attributed to authors such as Rudin, Glenn Ledder, and Mirabai Starr in the course bibliographies are simply untraceable.
What is at stake
The signatories warn that these curriculum flaws will do more than just compromise students’ mathematical education; they risk ‘crippling’ future generations by eroding both research capabilities and industry standards. They lament that ‘Applied mathematics is short-changed; programming and numerical methods are outside the core. Statistics is stuffed into one course.’ The petition underscores that a crucial opportunity has been missed to incorporate practical, application-based components, which are fundamental in fields like statistics, machine learning, and artificial intelligence.
These academics emphasize that the negative repercussions will reach far beyond the classroom, impacting science, technology, and India’s overall capacity for innovation.
A call for redrafting
The experts assert that India possesses an abundance of globally respected mathematicians and educators perfectly capable of crafting a balanced and relevant curriculum. They highlight the urgent need for the UGC to leverage this invaluable national expertise.
The petition firmly states, ‘A nation with such a rich heritage of performing well in mathematics should have a curriculum that equips its students to meet the demands of the contemporary world.’ Their singular, unanimous recommendation is unambiguous: withdraw the current draft and form a new committee of experts in both mathematics and pedagogy to develop a curriculum that is rigorous, practical, and truly prepared for the future.
This petition represents one of the most significant challenges ever leveled against a UGC curriculum draft, powerfully highlighting the critical stakes involved: the very future of mathematics education and the bedrock of scientific progress in India. Currently, it remains a draft. The UGC’s response—be it through revisions, withdrawal, or an attempt to quietly push it through—will determine whether this widespread criticism ignites meaningful change or simply becomes another forgotten academic dispute.