Educational Insights | Stay Informed with Edinbox

The recent row over the reported incident of a Hindu candidate being requested to remove their Janeu (sacred thread) while writing the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) in Karnataka has invited political outrage as well as vociferous public debate over the thin line between security protocols while conducting exams and religious feelings.

Karnataka's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) moved swiftly in response, organizing protests and labeling exam officials as insensitive and biased. Taking it a step further by making the offer to ban the invite to prevent a religious symbol was too much for most observers and activists, challenging cultural sensitivity and tolerance of national exam procedures.

NEET, as already intimidating a portal to medical school as it is, is already a choking experience for students. Such pressures, combined with the inherent pressure of an academic setting, are an additional psychic strain—especially when religion and identity are brought under such politicized scrutiny.

While security screening is a necessary part of offering even and cheat-free tests, this case appropriately poses a very significant question: Where exactly does the line lie between upholding security and safeguarding religious freedom? It's a question echoing far beyond the limits of this one example, with constitutional protections of religious freedom and potential for better, more thoughtful policy that doesn't victimize or isolate any particular group.

The National Testing Agency (NTA) until now remained committed to stringent examination integrity measures but is now urged to justify and maybe modify processes not to bear witness to such an event again.

In itself, the row calls for heightened policy discussion and sensitivity training—preventing efforts to pursue equity in examinations from crossing borders inadvertently of a multicultural nation's religious and cultural history.

As this play is enacted, there can be no doubt that the dialogue is no longer necessarily about a test. It's about how we, as a society, balance respect, equity, and trust in our most important public institutions.

The internship Sujata Kini did last summer was supposed to be a footnote in her education—a two-month, unpaid stint at the request of her college. But it changed the course of her career, redirecting her away from the family logistics company and into a bright future at a private insurance company. Her tale is representative of what policymakers hope for: internships as transformative, experiential learning that closes the wide gap between classrooms and careers.

But for Maharashtra's higher education environment, a new mandatory internship requirement is set to be as much a logistical nightmare as it is a forward-thinking reform.

From this year, more than 900 University of Mumbai-affiliated colleges are preparing to introduce a central tenet of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020: four-credit (120 hours) On-the-Job Training (OJT) mandatory for every undergraduate student, across streams, prior to graduation. That's roughly 75,000 students seeking placements annually.

The problem? There just aren't that many opportunities.

Colleges welcome the intention—practical experience does hone skills and enhance employability—but the scale of rollout is revealing an intrinsic disconnect between policy aspiration and reality on the ground. Industry connections, the strength of OJT, are sparsely deployed. Large numbers of businesses don't have the infrastructure or appetite to receive interns in large groups, and existing networks  are being pushed to the limit.

Some universities are being innovative. St. Xavier's is recruiting parents as possible bridge to industry contacts; HR College is investigating dispensations for commerce students whose CA articleships will coincide with OJT requirements. While students from non-professional courses, such as history or pure sciences, have to resort to being resourceful—approaching internships in museums, research centers, and NGOs in order to meet criteria that didn't exist before on their horizons.

Mumbai University is promoting field visits and workshops as stop-gap measures, but these are, at best, half-measures. The larger issue is that without a firmer framework—either legal requirements forcing industries to take part or increased government-sponsored schemes—the policy runs the risk of being an administrative box-ticking exercise rather than a substantive experience.

As the May deadline approaches, the message is clear: intent is not enough. To make internships a game-changer in reality, systemic support, strong industry collaboration, and maybe new legislation are needed urgently. Otherwise, students will be pursuing opportunities that do not yet exist.

The move by Azim Premji University of announcing the opening of 2026 admissions for its Postgraduate Diploma in Development Leadership is a timely and necessary step towards developing better leaders in the social sector. While grassroots leadership and sustainable development require efficient, empathetic professionals, this course is tailored to be equipped with the strategic vision and practical skills required to deliver impact. By combining theory with interactive fieldwork, the university enhances its commitment to closing learning gaps and resolving complex development challenges across India.

Azim Premji University, Bengaluru, has invited applications for admissions to its Postgraduate Diploma in Development Leadership for the batch of 2026. This distance Diploma course is intended for development professionals currently working and desirous of upgrading their qualifications and skills without giving up work.

The programme will take 11 months, three academic terms across. Participants have the option of completing the programme both online and on-campus to enable them to work while at the same time studying, as per a university press release.

As per the university, this program is best suited for mid to senior professionals having eight or more years of experience in the development field and having held or willing to hold leadership positions in NGOs, social movements, and grassroots organizations.

The programme assures participants a better understanding of historical & social dynamics and lived experiences that condition development in India, and capacity to devise and design development schemes that are just, promote justice and are sustainable.

In addition, the programme aims at developing inclusivity, flexibility and teamwork among participants, which would enhance their leadership skills.

It also assures to develop their financial management, communication, and data analysis skills.

Azim Premji University's programme enables mid-career and senior professionals in the development sector to step back and place their organizational experiences within the broader visions of development. This enables them to open up their horizon so as to inform their work and leadership capability better," said Arima Mishra, Director, School of Development, Azim Premji University, elaborating further about the offerings of the programme.

Following the university, applicants need to apply for the programme by May 31, 2025.

Applicants would then need to appear for a written examination and interviews in June-July 2025. Classes for shortlisted candidates will start in the first week of January 2026.

Interested applicants can see how to apply for this program and additional information on program content, eligibility and fees, on the official university website.

It also says that it improves their skills in financial management, communication and data analysis.

"The program enables mid-career and senior practitioners in the field to take a step back and place their organizational experiences in the broader development perspectives. It enables them to expand their lens to better frame their work and ability to lead," said Arima Mishra, Director, School of Development, Azim Premji University, speaking more about the programme offerings.

As per the university, candidates should apply for the programme by May 31, 2025. Candidates would then need to appear for a written test and interviews in June and July 2025. Classes for shortlisted candidates will begin in the first week of January 2026.

In a city that boasts of intellectual tolerance and cultural acceptance, the increasing concern among Kashmiri students in Pune is both pathetic and heart-wrenchingly sad. Although Pune itself has not seen any direct threat, the ripple effect of hate and violence from other states—specifically the reported attacks on students in Punjab and Uttarakhand in the wake of the Pahalgam terror attack—is being felt in hushed phone calls from anxious parents and silent disappearances from classrooms.

Alloof more than 1,000 students have come here in Pune from Jammu & Kashmir already. Getting here for all of them did not prove that simple—there was sacrifice asked from families, resistance of fear overcome, gambling with hope against uncertainty of refuge and possibilities. And yet with the fear kicking in now, all this belief can shatter, and its very first victim may be education.

These students, already battling the traumas of displacement, cultural adaptation, and educational stress, are now emotionally besieged—a reminder that for them, even education is contingent. It is not just individual resolve on their part to remain on and learn but also the faith of their parents in a system that does not always shield them when they most need protection, as seen through students like Mohammad Shafi and Ruqaiya Maqbool.

This is not the first time. Post-Pulwama, numerous students went back home in compulsion and never returned. To let history repeat itself is not administrative sloppiness—it is a failure of our collective conscience.

Schools, local police, and civil society in Pune need to act now—not respond later. Meetings with the police commissioner are always welcome, but talk must be turned into policies: 24/7 helplines, checks for safe accommodation, and public messaging that encourages inclusion are the need of the hour. The message must be clear—terror will not divide us, and students will not be punished for crimes they did not commit.

India's promise to its youth is that education will make them better, not worse. To shatter that for any group, particularly one as vulnerable as Kashmiris studying outside their state, is to violate the principles of a fair and democratic republic. Let us not fail them again.

America is experiencing an unprecedented demographic transformation as its birth rate falls to record low of 1.62 births per woman, far below the replacement rate of 2.1. The staggering figure is raising concerns about the long-term implications for the labor market, economic growth, and national security. Consequently, the Trump administration has offered a variety of incentives with the aim of triggering increased birth rates, from a "baby bonus" for expectant mothers to easier access to IVF procedures, parent scholarships, and even creating a National Medal of Motherhood to celebrate the social contribution of mothers. While the US is concerned about reversing its declining population trend, India with all its increasing population is dealing with a different set of population issues.

For India, it is a reverse scenario. While the population is still increasing in the country, it is the failure to give equal access to healthcare, education, and resources to the increasing youth that is the issue. India's birth rate, while still well above replacement level at approximately 2.2 births per woman, is also declining in some areas. The government has increasingly been placing greater emphasis on controlling population growth by means of family planning programs, promoting smaller family sizes, and offering incentives for family planning. Here, India's population issues are less a matter of growing its gigantic population and resolving issues such as unemployment and underemployment, than about managing its population.

The Trump administration's plans, like offering a $5,000 baby bonus to new mothers, are actually the antithesis of India's population-control strategy. America is trying to create a motive for people to have more children by compensating them for it as it sees an aging population and future worker shortage looming. India, by contrast, has continued to go for population-control measures like sterilization drives and family planning seminars with the intention of stopping overpopulation.

Another field where the US and India differ is healthcare. The US is increasing access to IVF treatment to support childless couples, taking into consideration the increasing role of family planning played by reproductive technologies. In India, though IVF is increasing in urban areas, it is beyond the reach of most people because of its price and lack of easy access to expert medical facilities.

Moreover, there is a unique economic context of hardships involved with childrearing in India. Whereas the proposals of the US government involve scholarships for parents to ease the financial burdens, Indian economic welfare programs like the Public Distribution System (PDS) and the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) focus on general welfare but are criticized for not meeting population requirements.

And as for the National Medal of Motherhood, which is a proposal currently under discussion by the Trump administration, it's a curious cultural gesture expressive of a Western cultural value on motherhood. In India, however, cultural reverence for mothers is already a deeply rooted aspect of its society with little requirement for official certification in the form of medals or awards. Instead, India consistently focuses on women empowerment policies, such as promoting female literacy, ensuring maternal care, and eradicating child labor.

Both nations are driven by various issues in the government's population policy: the US is worried about its shrinking and aging population issues, while India is concerned with how to manage its fast-growing population and how to equip its large youth population with the resources and opportunities needed to succeed.

As the US looks to monetary rewards and policy adjustments to increase its population, India remains to fight to control its current demographic issue. Both countries, however, have serious hindrances in the way of economic inequality, education access, and a rising cost of living. Whether in the form of incentives to boost birth levels or population policies, both nations are attempting to address complicated population trends but through different means more suited to their own socio-economic and cultural climates.

As the US moves forward with its initiatives, only time will determine whether they will be able to reverse the birth rate decline. In the meantime, India continues to labor towards solving the increasingly pressing issue of taking care of its vast population, keeping growth in harmony with sustainability. Both countries need to turn towards more holistic social policy that encompasses not only the quantity of births, but the quality of life of the families that bring those children into being.

Some associations of teachers and university students have recently made submissions to the top officials of the state's department of higher education, seeking the latter's permission to introduce a single window system of admission to the state's government-aided arts and science colleges and private self-financing colleges.

The office-bearers of the associations -- Association of University Teachers (AUT), Madurai Kamaraj, Manonmaniam Sundaranar, Mother Teresa and Alagappa University Teachers' Association (MUTA), Makkal Kalvi Kootiyakkam, and Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI) -- have been banking on the state government to introduce the system in the coming academic year; the majority of them noted that the system would bring transparency in fee structure and reservation.

In April of last year, while K Karmegam was the collegiate education commissioner, a committee for the purpose was formed and made recommendations on the adoption of the single-window system.

But the process was suspended subsequently by the higher education department.

AUT former president P Thirunavukarasu described to TNIE that the system, already implemented for admission into engineering and government arts and science colleges, could surely be used in government-aided arts and science colleges and self-financing private colleges.

If introduced, the system will stop collection of capitation fees and make admissions and reservations transparent. One application will suffice for a student to apply for admission to a course in state government-aided arts and science colleges, he added.

Makkal Kalvi Kootiyakkam coordinator Prof R Murali said, "While initiating the system, the government has to clearly mention that stringent action would be initiated against institutions that act against the norms."

MUTA ex-general secretary M Nagarajan stated that a merit-based entry system, besides providing social justice, would enable the students to select colleges and courses according to their preference.

"Today, aided colleges are extorting huge amounts of fees from the students for the aided courses. It should be done away with," he remarked, making the allegation of inaction by the government on this count against the managements of institutions on the complaints of students.

He further added that introducing the single window system of admission would "put an end to all the irregularities that are being done at government-aided colleges and self-financing institutions."

DYFI district treasurer S Veldeva said, "The government can establish district-wise facilitation centres to facilitate the admission process smoothly, enabling students to select colleges and courses online."

Although TNIE tried, higher education department principal Secretary C Samyamoorthy and joint secretary private college management association of Madurai Kamaraj University Zone M Davamani Christober could not be contacted for comment.