NEW DELHI: The human resource development ministry’s proposal to cut the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) syllabus by half has left educationists divided. One school of experts has welcomed it, while another says students’ knowledge will take a hit.Rather than announcing a new national curriculum framework to update the syllabus — the last revision was in 2005 — the ministry has said it would cut 50% of the syllabus. While the aim of the cut — to make time for sports and other skills and allow students a choice of subjects — is good, experts wonder whether this is the best way to achieve it.“Syllabus review should be based on policies and academic reports not done arbitrarily,” said Professor Janaki Rajan, department of teacher training, Jamia Millia Islamia. “We are told that it’s a knowledge economy now, so it’s baffling that the government wants to halve the syllabus.”Others believe 40% of the syllabus is obsolete and should be trimmed. “The syllabus was last reviewed in 2005 and we are still teaching that. Knowledge doubles every three to four years, and 40% of our content is obsolete,” said Ashok Ganguly, former CBSE chairman and director of SCERT Uttar Pradesh.An overall change in teaching methods is required. “First-generation learners cannot be graded alongside those who have the privilege of educated parents. The answer is not to reduce standards for all, but to have basic and advanced levels for subjects,” said Anuradha Joshi, principal, Sardar Patel Vidyalaya, New Delhi. For example, she says, there could be two streams for mathematics; while the entire class does general mathematics, those with interest or ability can opt for an advanced paper. “It is the teaching system that needs to be changed and a reduction in syllabus alone won’t help,” said Joshi.The Delhi government earlier said it would drop 25% of the syllabus, a move educationists say was not thought through. “The AAP government proclaimed a 25% cut without any academic basis. Their cuts showed a lack of understanding of the purpose of education and the knowledge that is required,” said Rajan. She gave the example of the proposal to do away with lessons on the Constitution for Class 8 as it was taught in Class 12. “But only children in social science streams study the Constitution in Class 12. Science and commerce students would grow up without vital knowledge,” she said.While advocating for updation of the syllabus, eminent educationist and former member of the RTE council Mrinal Miri said, “A syllabus review requires critical reflection.”Schools would like National Council Of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) to compare physics, chemistry, biology and economics lessons for Classes 11 and 12 with what is taught in the first year of college. “A lot of the material is repeated,” said Joshi. “Rather than reducing the syllabus, the language of teaching should be made child-friendly. If a child can understand in the early years, he develops an essential skill set,” she said.Avnita Bir, director and principal, RN Podar School, Mumbai, said, “A review is required but it can’t be done mindlessly.” She said teachers and school heads from across the country had to be consulted. “When everyone contributes to the change, there is a better sense of ownership and it will help the government understand ground realities,” said Bir.