Educational Insights | Stay Informed with Edinbox

The idea of a 4-day workweek is no longer just a fringe theory or some Scandinavian social experiment. It’s being talked about seriously,in boardrooms, HR departments, Twitter threads, and coffee breaks. Around the world, it’s already being tested. Companies are trimming the workweek, not the paycheck, and many of them are seeing surprising results i.e happier employees, fewer sick leaves, and perhaps most unexpected of all equal or even improved productivity.

But here’s the real question-Is India ready for something like this?

India’s work culture has always been intense. Long hours are standard, and overtime is more of an expectation than a bonus. We’ve internalized the idea that the more time you spend at your desk (or on your laptop at home), the more valuable you are to your team. “Work-life balance” often becomes just another line in job descriptions which is rarely something that feels tangible.

So, suggesting a 4-day week can sound, frankly, unrealistic. But is it really?

A few Indian companies have already started experimenting. Some startups offer occasional 4-day weeks to help employees reset. Larger firms, like Swiggy, introduced policies like monthly “wellness days” or flexible work-from-anywhere setups. These may not be permanent shifts to a 32-hour week, but they’re testing the waters. Quietly, cautiously but meaningfully.

The global context matters here. In 2022, a UK trial involving dozens of companies tried out a 4-day workweek for six months. The results? Most of them kept it. Employees were less stressed. Productivity remained steady or even went up. And companies didn’t lose money. In fact, some saved on overhead costs and attrition.

That kind of success is hard to ignore. But transplanting those results directly into an Indian setting isn’t so simple.

A huge chunk of India’s workforce isn’t sitting in air-conditioned offices. They’re in factories, fields, retail shops, construction sites, delivery routes. For them, fewer workdays could mean fewer wages. In the informal sector, which makes up over 80% of the country’s employment, a day off is often a luxury they can’t afford and not something an HR department can grant.

Even in the formal sector, challenges remain. Many Indian companies operate on tight timelines, often dictated by clients in different time zones. The pressure to be “always on” isn’t just internal, it comes from global competition. Shaving a day off the week might mean rethinking how work is planned, tracked, and valued. That requires more than just optimism. It demands systems, discipline, and a big shift in mindset.

And that mindset shift might be the hardest part.

We still reward presence more than performance. An employee who stays late is often praised, even if they weren’t particularly effective during the day. There’s a deep-rooted belief that long hours equal hard work. Until that changes, shorter weeks may be seen as slacking off, not smart planning.

But culture doesn’t change all at once. It changes through cracks,through people questioning old assumptions and trying new things. And right now, those cracks are forming. The pandemic forced organizations to trust employees to work remotely. Many found that output didn’t drop. Some even admitted it got better. That trust, once rare, is now growing. And with it, so is the space to ask new questions.

What if more hours doesn’t always mean better results?

What if giving people more time off actually makes them more focused when they’re working?

What if being “productive” isn’t about staying online until midnight, but about solving problems efficiently,and then logging off?

India may not be ready for a sweeping, nationwide shift to a 4-day workweek tomorrow. But it is ready for the conversation. Some sectors will move faster than others. Tech, media, and startups might lead the way. Manufacturing and frontline services may follow more slowly, with different models. That’s okay. Progress doesn’t have to be uniform.

The bigger point is this: we’re starting to question whether the old ways of working still make sense. And that’s where change begins,not with bold declarations, but with curiosity, with experiments, and with a willingness to rethink the things we’ve taken for granted.

A 4-day workweek in India isn’t impossible. It just needs the right people to take it seriously. And increasingly, they are.

 By Aditi Sawarkar

There’s something oddly comforting about framing your life like a movie, as if it gives meaning to the quiet, messy, in-between moments. You step onto a train platform, the wind catches your coat just right, and in your mind, the camera pans out as a soft indie track fades in. You feel like you’re not just existing—you’re living. And not just living, but starring. That’s the idea behind what’s now casually called Main Character Syndrome

While it’s not a clinical diagnosis, it’s more like a cultural shorthand for a mindset ,seeing yourself as the main character in your own life. At its best, it can be a healthy and empowering way to understand your experiences.

Why It Can Be Empowering

At its core, Main Character Syndrome is about being your own agency. It encourages people to take charge of their choices, pay attention to their surroundings, and move through life with intention. Rather than feeling like a background extra in someone else’s story, you’re placing yourself front and center. 

For some, especially those with a history of emotional neglect, isolation, or trauma, Main Character Syndrome can become a form of psychological self-preservation. It allows people to rewrite their role in painful memories, to imagine control where there was none, and to create meaning out of things that once felt senseless. In that way, it can be healing.Seeing yourself as the main character can help you reclaim the sense of control that trauma may have taken  away.But when it becomes the only way to feel seen or safe, it starts to shift from empowerment to coping mechanism,from creative lens to emotional armor.

There’s a quiet kind of freedom in letting yourself feel important , not in a dramatic or self-centered way, but in a gentle, personal one. It can mean taking yourself seriously. Leaving a job that drains you. Saying no without guilt. Dressing the way you want even if no one understands it. Doing things for you, not just for how they look from the outside, but because you recognize your own worth.

This mindset can also help people find meaning in the mundane. A late-night walk, a difficult conversation, a moment of solitude,they become part of a larger arc. The boring or hard parts of life aren’t detours; they’re part of the plot. That kind of framing can help you stick through low points, because the story isn’t over yet. It gives emotional weight to otherwise overlooked experiences.

It can also foster creativity. People with a main-character mindset are often more reflective, more observant, and more inclined to notice beauty or metaphor in everyday things. They’re building a narrative in real time, and that can inspire writing, art, or even just deeper self-awareness,In this sense, Main Character Syndrome isn’t just about self-indulgent daydreaming , it’s a way of engaging with life that helps people feel more alive and more present.

Where It Starts to Get Complicated

But here’s the other side of  the same mindset that can uplift you and can also distort reality.

When the focus is always on your story, it’s easy to forget that everyone else is living theirs, too. People don’t exist just to enter and exit your narrative. They have entire inner worlds of their own ones that don’t revolve around you. When Main Character Syndrome is taken too far, it can oversimplify those complexities. Friends might be seen as mere “side characters,” strangers as background extras, and conflicts as plots.

There’s also the danger of turning real life into a performance. If you're always the lead in your imagined screenplay, then you’re always aware of the “audience,” even if that audience only lives in your head. You start to ask: how does this moment look, instead of how does it feel? Your choices might start to drift toward aesthetic coherence over genuine satisfaction.

That can spiral into disconnection. From yourself. From others. From the present moment.

And then there’s the emotional toll. When you’re constantly trying to find narrative structure in everything, life’s messiness can feel like failure. Real growth isn’t always cinematic. Sometimes it’s slow, confusing, or even invisible. If you expect every setback to be a setup for a perfect redemption arc, the mess will start to feel unbearable.

The Balance

The truth is, we’re all main characters in our own stories  and background characters in others’. You might be the focus in your life, but in someone else’s, you’re just a passing moment. The most grounded version of Main Character Syndrome is the one that keeps this important aspect in mind

Use the lens when you need help to  take  the ownership of your own  life. When it reminds you that you matter. When it encourages you to care about your own experience. But put the lens down when it starts to make you believe that you’re more real than anyone else.

Sometimes the story isn’t about you. Sometimes your moment isn’t being watched. And sometimes the most meaningful parts of life don’t feel like anything much at all. That doesn’t make them less important. It just makes them human.

So is Main Character Syndrome empowering? Absolutely. Can it be escapist? Definitely. The key is knowing when to use it and when to step out of the spotlight.

By Aditi Sawarkar

In a uplifting vote of confidence for government education, Andhra Pradesh HRD and IT Minister Nara Lokesh on Sunday praised a band of school teachers who have admitted their own children to government schools, referring to them as the real "Brand Ambassadors for Government Education."

Going to social media platform X (previously Twitter), Lokesh complimented the teachers for the continued faith and commitment in the government school system. He observed that the academic achievements of their children are a reflection of the quality of education in public schools—often comparable to or even superior to private schools.

"Master stars such as these are our 'Stars' Brand Ambassadors for Government Education. Hats off to you," Lokesh applauded, praising the teachers not only for their professional work, but also for setting a personal example.

Lokesh particularly mentioned:

Bonthu Madhubabu, School Assistant of Jinnur ZP School in Podur Mandal, West Godavari

Babu Rajendra Prasad, Gym Teacher at Pangidigudem High School

Veeravasarapu Balakarunakara Rao, Teacher at Somaraju Cheruvu Primary School

All three have opted to send their children to government schools, and the high scores obtained by the students have become beacons of excellence of the potential of public education.

"The achievement by your children who attended government schools is a direct proof that government schools are superior to private schools," Lokesh underlined.

The post gained popular support rapidly online as users praised the teachers for their stand and the state government for building confidence in government schools.

The move comes as Andhra Pradesh pursues its efforts to transform and raise government schools through infrastructure improvements, digital education platforms, and teacher capacities–as part of an overall effort to make quality education affordable and equitable.

Nobel laureate scholar S Ramakrishna has pressed for the reform of India's education system, guiding policymakers and educators away from a teacher-centric, examination-centric model to an integrated, student-centric model. Delivered in an insightful speech, Ramakrishna made the effort to contrast India's conventional model with international models — the US can serve as an example here — and to outline how a shift needed to be made in order to become modernized in the manner in which we examine and educate students.

As opposed to India's massive, lectured masses based on rote memorization, Ramakrishna admired the United States' smaller, interactive, individualized learning centers, where open-ended exams and small class sizes promote creativity and critical thinking. "It's time we stop testing intelligence through memory alone," he said. "We have to start appreciating skills, innovation, and emotional intelligence as much."

One of his most forceful suggestions is to decentralize the curriculum to give students more room and latitude for their own learning trajectory. He also urged embracing the Grade Point Average (GPA) system over the inflexible, high-stakes board examination system, which tends to reduce student achievement to a single score.

In the same spirit, Ramakrishna emphasized providing schools with mental health services, particularly for rural and disadvantaged populations. He advocated against corporal punishment, behavior support and conflict resolution teachers' training, and giving consideration to mental well-being as an integral part of school practice.

In order to present his recommendations in a more formalized way, Ramakrishna is drafting a policy paper for presentation to the government. What he is seeking to do is initiate national debate about education reform and lay the ground for an emergent system which is inclusive, contemporary, and based on lifelong learning.

With the nation fighting problems of inequality and archaic methods in the education sector, Ramakrishna's vision is a long-overdue and opportune path towards a brighter future.

A single post. A trending hashtag. A 30-second reel breaking down the ongoing  injustice. This is how protest begins in the digital age. But behind every viral campaign there lies a bigger question: Do online protests actually lead to real-world impact, or are we all stuck in a cycle of performative engagement?

The answer is layered… Yes, online activism can lead to change but only when it’s paired with strategy, structure, and constant pressure.

Awareness, The First, Easiest Step

Social media excels at visibility. According to a Pew Research Center survey, 80% of Americans believe platforms like Instagram and X (formerly Twitter) help bring attention to underreported issues. Around 77% say social media helps people mobilize support for causes they care about.

However, the numbers begin to dip when measuring impact. Only 65% of respondents believe these platforms succeed in capturing the attention of elected officials. Even fewer i.e just 58% think social media changes minds or influences policy. In short, spreading awareness is easy but converting it into real-world outcomes is far more complex.

From Posts to Protests

While it’s easy to write off digital engagement as “slacktivism,” research shows it’s often a gateway to deeper involvement. A study from CIRCLE at Tufts University found that young people who engage with social and political issues online are three times more likely to take action offline,whether that’s signing a petition, donating, attending a rally, or volunteering.

A striking example from India is the 2020–21 farmers’ protest. What began as opposition to three controversial farm laws quickly gained online traction. The hashtag #FarmersProtest trended globally, accumulating over 12 million mentions in a matter of months. This digital momentum connected rural voices to national and international audiences, amplifying pressure on policymakers until the laws were eventually repealed.

Social media didn’t replace protest, it just amplified it.

When Hashtags Create Headlines

History offers several examples where online activism has  directly influenced real-world outcomes.

In 2012, protests against the U.S. anti-piracy bills SOPA and PIPA saw major websites like Wikipedia and Reddit temporarily go dark. Over 4.5 million people signed petitions within 24 hours, leading to the withdrawal of both bills.

During the Arab Spring, social media served as a vital tool for organizing demonstrations, sharing real-time updates. Protesters in Tunisia, Egypt, and beyond relied on digital platforms to build momentum across borders.

In India, the #PinjraTod movement began as an online critique of discriminatory hostel curfews for women. It soon sparked campus protests, legal challenges, and institutional policy reviews.

The anti-CAA and NRC protests were supported by hashtags such as #IndiaAgainstCAA and #NoNRC, which provided legal information, busted misinformation, and mobilized thousands to attend on-ground demonstrations.

When Virality Isn’t Victory

That said, not all viral campaigns succeed. In fact, sometimes visibility works against the cause.

In the United Kingdom, the “Just Stop Oil” protest made headlines when activists threw soup at a Van Gogh painting. While media coverage was widespread, public support for climate activism dipped in the aftermath. Attention doesn’t always translate into alignment.

Closer to home, the disturbing cases of Sulli Deals and Bulli Bai,where Muslim women were “auctioned” on fake apps sparked national outrage online. Yet, despite the massive visibility, the initial legal response was slow and disappointing. Viral attention does not guarantee systemic accountability.

The Power and Limitations of Digital Space

Digital activism is often mocked as “clicktivism,” but that criticism oversimplifies a complex reality. In a country as vast and diverse as India, online platforms are not just tools,they’re lifelines. For many, especially those facing systemic or geographic barriers, the internet is the only accessible space for expression, organizing, and mobilization. Of course, liking a post won’t overturn a policy. But it might inform someone, shift public sentiment, or encourage a first-time voter to act.

Real-World Lessons: What Works, What Hurts

This recent Indian case.illustrate the double-edged nature of online protests

In the Kolkata gangrape case, social media platforms were flooded with outrage, hashtags, and calls for justice. But despite this widespread digital momentum, progress in the investigation remains unclear and justice feels delayed.

Can Online Protests Create Change?

Yes,but not in isolation. Online movements thrive when paired with real-world organizing, accurate information, and long-term pressure. When done right, they can amplify unheard voices, expose injustice, and even shift government policy. But without strategy, they risk fizzling out or worse, backfiring.

Social media won’t fix the world. But it can start something. And sometimes, starting something is exactly what’s needed!

By Aditi Sawarkar

In a step that has raised alarm worldwide, the US Embassy in India instructed all F, M, and J non-immigrant visa seekers—long working on behalf of exchange students in academia, vocational training, and culture—to make their social media accounts public, "effective immediately." The instruction, which covers sites such as Facebook, Instagram, X, LinkedIn, YouTube, and TikTok, is a significant ramp-up on online surveillance under the Trump administration's immigration policy.

Though portrayed as a national security action, the move is criticized for singling out student voices, particularly foreign students who have newly become involved in protests, such as Palestinian rights protests on American campuses. These protests, involving foreign students' participation, seem to have given wings to the administration's push to deepen monitoring of political alignments and sentiments.

All visa decisions are issues of national security," the US Embassy stated. But to many thousands of young potential students who are getting ready to study in the US this fall, this now translates to making their individual online lives a matter of public records—or facing rejection.

The US State Department previously maintained that consular authorities will screen out blog posts that could express "anti-American sentiment" or any membership with proscribed groups. But such a subjective measure threatens to disenfranchise students based on harmless political views, cultural expression, or even satires—stretching the borders of free speech.

It's a high-stakes game. The majority of students, especially Indians and those from the Middle East, are no longer sure how much of their past online behavior can be used against them. Will disagreement with US foreign policy be a red flag? And what about silence—will students who have no social media presence be considered suspicious?

Though proponents of the policy refer to national interest, privacy advocates are cautioning that it has the potential to institutionalize view-point discrimination, particularly towards residents from politically vulnerable areas. Lawyers are also fighting over whether it constitutes a breach of First Amendment principles, particularly towards foreign students when they set foot on US soil.

There are more than 15% more foreign students at almost 200 American institutions, generating billions of dollars and foreign talent. That legacy can be jeopardized—by making a dream destination a virtual self-censorship zone.