Catherine Hezser's Rabbinic Scholarship and the Rise of Scholasticism: The Case of the Talmud Yerushalmi is a richly ambitious and learned book on the history of rabbinic literature. Situating the Talmud Yerushalmi in the wider intellectual universe of late antiquity, Hezser offers the reader a bold new vision of how rabbinic scholarship developed in Roman-Byzantine Palestine.

Hezser starts by relocating the Yerushalmi rabbis as intellectuals on a par with their Greco-Roman and early Christian peers. She makes astute comparisons between rabbinic "sages" and Greek-trained Christian authors, laying the groundwork for detailed examination of educational systems of the era. Rabbinic education, she demonstrates, occurred in various venues—from study groups to public ad hoc encounters—instead of within the formal institutional schools. This is typical of Roman and Hellenistic practice, under which sophisticated studies had a tendency to group themselves around close disciples' circles. One of the book's strengths is the manner in which rabbinic scholarship was transmitted orally from one generation to another.

The procedure, it is claimed, was largely oral, with written records being taken as little as possible for personal use. She points out the antipathy which rabbis held against codified compendia due to fear of widespread dissemination into halachic anarchy. Her critique of the activity of "tradents," the ideologically correct to quote verbatim the sayings of sages, is especially astute, offering a comparison to such behavior elsewhere in late antique scholarship. The book further engages with the networks along which rabbinic traditions were circulated and maintained, both horizontally in relations between contemporaries and vertically in lines of teacher and student. Hezser's comparative methodology is strongest here, comparing rabbinic means of transmission of knowledge against more general tendencies in Greco-Roman and Christian intellectual networks.

Another highlight is her comparison of the Yerushalmi’s compilation techniques with those of Hellenistic philosophical works and Roman legal digests. Unlike early Christian texts that often aimed for doctrinal unity, the Yerushalmi embraces a pluralism of voices and opinions, echoing the works of Diogenes Laertius, Plutarch, and the Roman jurists. This plurality underscores the rabbinic value placed on debate, dialogue, and interpretive diversity.

Hezser also analyzes the rabbis' judicial functions in relation to Roman jurists who combined knowledge and public service. The rabbis not only instructed students, but they also addressed the public, responding to questions and providing advice and thereby expanding their mission of teaching into the public sphere.

In explaining editing and redaction of the Talmud Yerushalmi, Hezser demonstrates to us how it developed as a multi-voiced, layered digest instead of being the work of one author. She explains meticulously how redactors structured traditions topically based on the structuring of the Mishna, but expanded on it in halakhic debates too. Her analysis of editor-scribe interactions provides us with another vision of how the Talmud developed.

Yet a few of Hezser's conclusions are maybe debatable. Her account that the orality of rabbinic instruction was largely to maintain the authority of the rabbis underemphasizes theological motivations for orality, i.e., Sinai-like imitation. Likewise, her doubts over the reliability of attributions in rabbinic literature might have been less categorical, given the dynamics of manuscript transmission.

Although the scholarly level of the book might render it a challenge to a general readership, its well-researched material is a requirement for scholars. Hezser's command of sources in late antiquity—the New Testament to Roman law—is a deep expression of scholarship in depth.

Last but not least, Rabbinic Scholarship in the Context of Late Antique Scholasticism is a rich new contribution to our understanding of the intellectual culture that produced the Talmud Yerushalmi. Even if readers do not agree with some of Hezser's speculations, the book will surely stimulate additional research and discussion. For anyone genuinely interested in rabbinic literature or late antique intellectual history, this book is a necessary and rewarding read.

Taking a decision that has set off a controversy storm, the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) has added Hindi titles to English-medium textbooks. The decision, one of the roll-out plans of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, has been ferociously attacked, primarily by non-Hindi states.

At the center of the storm are the new titles themselves. Class 1 and 2 English textbooks have been named 'Mridang', and that of Class 3 has become 'Santoor'. The Class 6 English textbook 'Honeysuckle' is now 'Poorvi'. Although the idea behind this step might be to promote linguistic diversity, its critics say that it does the reverse.

Kerala General Education and Employment Minister V Sivankutty has been one of the loudest voices opposing the move. He referred to the renaming as an "ignorance of India's linguistic diversity" and argued that it was against the federal spirit of the Constitution. Sivankutty explained that titles of books deeply influence the imagination and mind of children, and it is a wrong effort to homogenize India's linguistic richness by enforcing Hindi book titles on English textbooks.

Similar concerns have also been expressed in Tamil Nadu, where there have been recurring complaints of "Hindi imposition" following the NEP. Chief Minister MK Stalin has accused the central government of denying funds to schools which are not being victims of the imposition of the three-language formula as prescribed by the policy.

While the debate rages on, it has once again brought to the fore the complex and controversial question of language in education. In a country as linguistically diverse as India, the question of what language to teach is a highly politicized one. While some argue that promoting the use of Hindi as a link language will be a step towards bridging cultural divides between multicultural groups, others argue that it is part of a process of movement towards a hegemonizing language imposing itself upon marginalized communities. With its recent move being a lightning rod for protests and bad publicity, however, the question of language in education by no means resolved, it seems.

Lastly, the choice of what language to employ for educational purposes should be done in light of values of social justice, inclusivity, and diversity. Through listening to all the stakeholders' complains and engaging in an enlightened and thoughtful conversation, we can endeavor to come up with an education system that best addresses the linguistic diverseness of the nation.

In a first that is a radical shift in the landscape of Indian education, Get Set Learn has partnered with Harvard Business Publishing Education (HBP Education) for the launch of leadership development and 21st-century skill development in K-12 schools. It is India's first to offer students an opportunity to build future-proof skills with a blended learning model that fuses digital platforms with live facilitation.

The curriculum is designed to foster the basic skills that the World Economic Forum's Education 4.0 report has listed as required for future workers—problem-solving, creativity, critical thinking, leadership, and emotional intelligence. As technological innovation and automation continue to revolutionize industries, students must not only be well-informed but also attitude and resilience to thrive in uncertain working environments.

At its center is a mixed learning design that combines interactive web-based modules, scenario simulation, and synchronous facilitator guidance. This allows the balance between self-learning and guided mentorship, maintaining students' motivation, focus, and needed guidance. Students are encouraged to relate learning to practice, mimicking real problem conditions and decision-making contexts. This mixed method of experiential learning achieves greater understanding of content and creates teamwork-based problem-solving and innovation.

One of the most significant elements of this collaboration is access to HBP Education's large library of over 400 carefully curated resources specifically designed for use by K-12 students. They include interactive case studies, leadership models, digital proficiency resources, and emotional intelligence software. All such materials are aligned to particular skills and micro-skills, so it is a well-organized but flexible learning process that is compliant with the National Education Policy (NEP). Learners thus acquire corresponding competencies while strengthening their current curriculum.

In addition to acquiring skills, the program aims to bridge the age-old gap between "hard" and "soft" skills in Indian education. Technical competence has so far been given priority over people and leadership skills. The program emphasizes both equally, redefining success in education as a spin-off of overall development.

In conversation with ETNOW.in, Ameet Zaverii, CEO and Co-founder of Get Set Learn, emphasized that the program’s long-term goal is to integrate these resources into school curricula across the country. “We’re not just teaching students to learn—we’re teaching them to lead,” he stated. The partnership aims to reach a broad network of schools, laying the foundation for a scalable model that can be replicated both nationally and globally.

The program's key performance indicators will be student engagement levels, analysis and leadership skill development, educator feedback, and practice skill development through projects and competitions. Ease of integration into existing curricula will also be a success measure.

In the years to come, the program can transform Indian school education from plain rote memorization to active skill-based learning. With more schools implementing this template, it can serve as a model for educational reform that makes Indian students not only educated, but future-ready.

In a major development that could chart the destiny of teacher training in India, fifteen globally respected education scholars from all over the world have penned an open letter to Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan calling upon the government to rethink its plan to withdraw the Bachelor of Elementary Education (B.El.Ed.) programme. The letter, written on Monday, vehemently opposes the National Council for Teacher Education's (NCTE) draft regulation proposals aimed at phasing out B.El.Ed. by the 2026–27 session and introducing the Integrated Teacher Education Programme (ITEP).

The decision comes at a time of increasing unease among scholarly circles regarding what has been termed an "ill-considered" policy change. The B.El.Ed. programme, launched by Delhi University in 1994, is an innovative four-year integrated undergraduate degree specially tailored for elementary education. It has since found acceptance by approximately 30 institutions nationwide. Over the course of three decades, it has earned a reputation for academic seriousness, a robust practicum, and a curriculum that combines disciplinary study with pedagogy.

Some of the signatories to the letter are internationally renowned scholars like Prof Edward Vickers (UNESCO Chair, Kyushu University), Prof Robin Alexander (University of Cambridge), and Prof Michael Apple (University of Wisconsin). These teachers, several of whom have been on the editorial advisory board of the NCTE's Indian Journal of Teacher Education, termed the proposal to replace B.El.Ed. with ITEP as "counter-productive," cautioning that it risks undoing decades of development in elementary teacher education.

"B.El.Ed. is a highly regarded teacher education programme that has stood the test of time over three decades," the letter read. "Discontinuing such a programme that is known for its excellence is counter-productive. Innovation is good when it builds upon what exists—not when it replaces tested models without appropriate thought."

ITEP, also an integrated course with four years of duration, came into operation under the aegis of National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 that stipulates minimum qualification of teachers at all levels as four-year integrated B.Ed. from the year 2030. Under pilot mode launching in the years 2023–24, ITEP has now begun operation in central, state, and selected state-affiliated universities, IITs, NITs, and colleges.

But critics point out that ITEP, being in its early stages, lacks the depth, foundation, and historical heritage of the B.El.Ed. programme. Former DU education dean Prof Anita Rampal, one of the chief architects of the B.El.Ed. curriculum, labelled NCTE's proposal as "shocking and short-sighted."

This course was initiated to fill an integral lacuna in the education system—there was no rigorous graduate-level training in teaching elementary class teachers prior to B.El.Ed.," said Prof Rampal. "We developed this course from ground zero and continued to enhance it year after year. Substituting it with ITEP, which has not yet shown similar outcomes, is likely to compromise the quality of teacher education.

The international scholars echoed similar concerns, noting that B.El.Ed. integrates subject knowledge, child development, pedagogy, and field-based practicum in a manner that few teacher education programmes globally can match.

“B.El.Ed. is renowned in India and abroad as an exemplary, world-class teacher education programme. It has empowered a generation of teachers with deep academic grounding and pedagogic competence,” said the letter.

Other signatories are Prof Paul Morris (UCL Institute of Education), Prof Yusuf Sayeed (University of Cambridge), Prof William Pinar (University of British Columbia), Prof Martin Carnoy (Stanford University), and Prof Angela Little (UCL), among others. These voices are some of the most esteemed institutions in international education policy, curriculum studies, and teacher education.

What has particularly troubled these experts is that the B.El.Ed. course is not merely another degree—it represents a long-overdue change in India's strategy for elementary education. For decades, B.Ed. courses concentrated largely on secondary education (Classes 9–12), with a crucial gap in teacher training for Classes 1 to 8, which now constitute the bulk of the Right to Education Act's mandate.

The NCTE draft rules that came out in February 2025 have raised alarm not only over their content but also over the pace of proposed implementation. With DU already declaring its admission procedure for ITEP from the 2025–26 academic year, the academic fraternity fears that B.El.Ed. could soon be pushed into oblivion without a proper analysis of the implications.

"Scrapping B.El.Ed. without a clear, evidence-based review erodes both India's teacher education system and the autonomy of institutions that have developed this programme," the scholars cautioned.

As India prepares for a significant overhaul of its education system under NEP 2020, the demand to preserve and enhance B.El.Ed. raises a pressing question to policymakers: Does progress require substituting what works, or does it require improving and expanding it?

The NCTE and the Ministry of Education have not officially replied to the letter as yet. Still, with the academic heavyweights having their say and student bodies likely to fall in line, the debate about the future of B.El.Ed. is anything but over.

Some of the students of Government Arts and Science College, Kangeyam, in Tiruppur are going around like headless chickens to obtain their degree certificate even after three years because the college administration did not take necessary action to distribute them through Bharathiar University.

Students claimed that the college administration has directed them to apply for degree certificates directly to Bharathiar University, in contrast to other government colleges where the application is usually made through the college administration.

One such student, K Vijaykumar (name changed), a student of BA English of 2019-22 batch told TNIE that according to instruction by the college, he himself had approached the university directly to degree certificate. He also recollected others that students themselves didn't approach even due to indolence.

"Nevertheless, I still haven't gotten it. Last year, the administration officer at the college instructed me to call the university when I made an inquiry. When I went to the university, they told me that I have to present a letter from the college before the degree certificate procedure can continue," he fretted.

"Because of this, I did not try after that. My friends too have not been given their degree certificates," he claimed.

Another student belonging to the same batch of the Computer Science department informed TNIE that he had given Rs 600 to university when he first applied for a degree certificate.

"Yet the university failed to send the certificate by mail. I received my certificate only when I presented at the university a letter of the Head of the Department attesting my studies here. For this, I paid a penalty of Rs 400 to the university. This was not necessary," he remembered.

Speaking about this, Education Development Committee coordinator K Leninbarathi said, "Generally, private and government colleges send applications for their students to Bharathiar University and receive degree certificates for eligible students. Colleges give the degree certificates to students at the time of their convocations. This is the college's duty."

"When the administration instructs students to take their degree certificates directly, they might encounter practical problems in receiving them from university. In addition, students will lose the festive experience of getting their degree certificates at the convocation," he noted.

When contacted, a senior officer in the examination wing of Bharathiar University informed TNIE that only students of Kangeyam college apply directly for degree certificates.

"Because of this, we cannot award degree certificates to the students, and there is a practical constraint in giving them. This is not preferable. We have told the college administration to apply for the certificates for all students rather than asking the students to apply directly to the university," he added.

According to The New Indian Express reports, college principal SF Naseem Jan told TNIE that only 100 students who completed their degrees during the COVID-19 pandemic are awaiting their certificates.

"We have taken steps to issue the degrees to the students through their respective heads of departments. Starting from this academic year, we will apply directly with the university for the certificates," she said.

Even with a liberal scholarship system, fee exemption, and hefty promotional campaigns, private medical schools in Kerala are facing a seemingly glaring problem: the lack of filling non-clinical postgraduate (PG) seats. In response to a recent query under the Right to Information Act (RTI), 28 seats in MD non-clinical courses like pharmacology, physiology, pathology, biochemistry, and anatomy are unfilled even after the end of the 2024 admission season.

The scenario reflects a worrying trend in the state's medical education system, where young physicians increasingly eschew non-clinical career options due to limited career opportunities and low return on investment.

"Even with these enticing promises, students shy away from taking non-clinical courses," claims Dr Ashik Basheer, state president, General Practitioners Association (GPA). "The actual issue is employability. Most students do not envision successful career development, particularly after forking out Rs 9–10 lakh per year for three years."

While clinical PG seats are highly competitive—with fees usually crossing Rs 17 lakh annually—non-clinical subjects have few takers. To get a clinical PG seat, candidates need to get a rank in the top 2,500 in the NEET-PG exam. For non-clinical courses, even the qualifying percentile is usually enough. But demand is lukewarm.

Private medical colleges have tried to fill this gap in demand by going in for aggressive marketing. One college official, who wished to remain anonymous, conceded that colleges often provide scholarships and fee waivers simply to get applicants. "But students are cautious," the official said. "They see little career opportunities in non-clinical areas, and the cost can be difficult to justify."

The disinterest in the non-clinical streams also jeopardizes the quality of undergraduate medical education. PG students in such departments also act as tutors to MBBS students, and they have an important role to play in core learning. "Without non-clinical PGs, the undergraduate teaching system becomes unsustainable," Dr. Basheer stressed.

Kulathoor Jaisingh, whose lawyer has filed an RTI regarding the imbalances, expressed concern over the imbalances. "We are facing a dearth of doctors, and PG seats, especially in clinical departments, are few. Authorities should give serious thought to increasing clinical PG seats, instead of providing cosmetic measures to fill non-clinical seats," he said.

Notably, the problem mostly exists within private colleges. Non-clinical seats in Kerala government medical colleges have all been filled, aided by superior institution reputation, cheaper tuition, and the added glory of training within the public sector.

Dr. Althaf A, a professor and epidemiologist at Government Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram, notices a trend. "Students are career-oriented. Non-clinical posts have improved working conditions, but no guarantee of placement. Those who take them do so out of personal interest or long-term academic goals," he stated. "The actual solution is to boost clinical PG intake in general."

With the state still churning out thousands of MBBS graduates every year, the growing gap between demand for clinical specializations and supply of available postgraduate opportunities risks derailing the career paths of young physicians and the healthcare delivery system as a whole.

Though incentives might provide short-term relief, experts indicate structural reforms and strategic seat allotment as the need of the hour to reconcile employability with educational infrastructure.

Creativity is a force that we typically celebrate for bringing innovation, art, and progress. It's the energy that drives science breakthroughs, the stroke of the brush that creates a work of art, and the idea that transforms the world. What if creativity crosses its boundaries though? When do we stop considering it inspiring and begin to say it's chaotic?

This is the question that has plagued every creator, manager, and even policymaker at some point: Where do we find the line between creativity and chaos?

The Myth of the Mad Genius

Pop culture mythologizes the "mad genius" — the person so full of ideas that they can't be kept in check by rules or routine. From Van Gogh to Steve Jobs, history is filled with geniuses whose genius lived on the edge of chaos. But where passion-driven chaos might create flashes of genius, uncontrolled chaos is not likely to construct anything lasting. An idea without structure is simply noise.

Creativity Needs a Canvas

Creativity, as water, requires a container. Boundaries don't kill creativity — they define it. A writer employs the constraints of language, a filmmaker within a frame, and a startup within budget. It's not the lack of rules that births genius; it's the intentional bending, stretching, and playing with them that does.

In design, we tend to refer to "structured freedom." That is the happy place — where imagination flourishes within limits that direct, but do not confine. Too much structure smothers spontaneity. Too little, and we have an incomprehensible mess.

The Workplace Conundrum

In creative professions, the pull between structure and freedom is most pronounced. Do you allow a team to brainstorm without timelines or deadlines, or do you create deadlines to have something delivered? The answer is balance. Creativity thrives in cultures where teams feel emotionally safe to explore — but are also held to a common aim.

Chaos can yield moments of genius, but long-term creativity — the kind that advances society — takes rhythm, discipline, and repetition.

Social Media, AI, and the New Age of Expression

In the current digital era, creativity is as democratized as it has ever been. Anyone has a platform, a voice, and the means to produce. But in the absence of editorial restraint or ethical limits, content can very easily descend into misinformation, clickbait, or noise. The distinction between expression and disruption has never been more blurred.

Even with AI, which is capable of producing poetry, code, or art in the blink of an eye, we need to consider: Are we amplifying creativity or fueling chaos? The tools are indifferent; it's up to us to use them.

Drawing the Line

So where do we set the boundary? The answer isn't absolute — it's context-dependent, intent-based, and impact-driven. But perhaps the aim isn't to construct a wall between creativity and chaos. Perhaps it's to create a bridge — a fluid framework that allows ideas to travel from free-wheeling imagination to purposeful action.

Creativity requires liberty. But to actually make a difference, it also requires direction.

More Articles ...