CBSE вводит систему оценки устной речи: 40 баллов за навыки слушания и говорения в 9 классе

Forty marks can change what a school considers important. On July 2, CBSE issued its R3 Language Assessment Framework for Class IX. One feature deserves attention: the framework follows an “Oral-First Pedagogy” and gives 40 marks to listening and speaking. These skills are to be assessed through activities conducted across the academic session. (https://cbseacademic.nic.in/web_material/Circulars/2026/46_Circular_2026.pdf) Pedagogically, this makes sense. Children listen before they read. They speak before they write. Language begins through interaction, not through textbooks. But in India, “oral-first” raises a larger question: what about languages that are not simply taught orally first, but continue to exist largely through speech? The numbers show why this matters. Census 2011 recognised 121 languages and 270 identifiable mother tongues with 10,000 or more speakers. UNESCO’s 2025 Bhasha Matters report, using a broader linguistic framework, refers to 1,369 languages in India(https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/unesco-launch-bhasha-matters-state-education-report-india-2025-mother-tongue-and-multilingual). Only 22 languages are included in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution. These figures are not directly comparable, but they point to one reality: India’s linguistic life is much larger than the languages normally visible in schools. Schools find it easy to recognise a language once it has a textbook, a syllabus, trained teachers and an examination. But what happens to a language that children hear at home, use with grandparents, or know through songs and stories, yet rarely see in print? Too often, very little. NEP 2020 already recommends the use of the home, mother, local or regional language as the medium of instruction wherever possible, at least until Grade 5 and preferably beyond. It also acknowledges that textbooks may not always be available in children’s home languages and recommends bilingual approaches. The National Curriculum Framework (NCF) for the Foundational Stage goes further. It recognises that young children learn through listening, talking and interaction, and that schools may not always have teachers who know every home language. In such cases, parents, community members and local speakers can help create linguistic bridges. It also recommends that children’s first languages should, where necessary, be used at least in the oral domain. (ncert.nic.in) This offers a practical way forward. Recognising a language does not always mean immediately creating a full school subject around it. It can begin more simply. A child can tell a story in the language spoken at home. A grandparent can record a folktale. Children can name plants, foods, animals and places in the languages they know. Schools can collect songs, conversations and oral histories. The first educational resource for an oral language does not always have to be a printed primer. It could be an audio archive. Technology makes this easier than before. A smartphone can record pronunciation, storytelling and everyday speech at very little cost. Such materials can support both learning and documentation. UNESCO’s 2025 report (https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/unesco-launch-bhasha-matters-state-education-report-india-2025-mother-tongue-and-multilingual) similarly recommends stronger multilingual teacher preparation, community participation, better learning resources and investment in inclusive language technologies. The real policy challenge, therefore, is no longer proving that children’s languages matter. Our major education documents already say that. The harder question is: which languages become visible when policy reaches the classroom? Schools already collect information about children’s age, attendance and academic performance. In multilingual areas, they could also maintain a simple language profile: what languages children speak or understand at home, which languages are used by family members, and whether community speakers are available. This should not become another bureaucratic exercise. Its purpose is simple: a teacher cannot draw on a child’s linguistic knowledge if the school does not know that knowledge exists. There is also a deeper problem. Smaller languages are often expected to arrive in schools already equipped with scripts, dictionaries, textbooks and trained teachers. But major languages developed such resources because institutions invested in them over time. Lack of resources should therefore be a reason for support, not a reason for exclusion. CBSE’s oral-first approach matters because it sends a useful message: what happens through the ear and the voice also counts as learning. For established languages, oral-first may simply be a better teaching sequence. For languages that still survive mainly through families and communities, however, recognising the oral may be the first step towards making them educationally visible. India often celebrates its multilingualism. The harder task is to build schools capable of hearing it. Perhaps the first question should not always be, Where is the textbook? It should be: Before the textbook speaks, what language does the child speak? Subscribe to Our Newsletter Get the latest CounterCurrents updates delivered straight to your inbox. Dr. Soumya Sankar Ghosh’s research focuses on education, language, and public policy, with particular attention to foundational literacy and numeracy among marginalised and mobile populations. He works on diagnostic and data-driven approaches to understanding learning outcomes across diverse and marginalised contexts in India.