Best of Both Sides: CBSE's two levels of Math is a bad idea
CBSE currently offers Mathematics at two levels in Class X, where both basic and standard levels follow the same syllabus, but the examination for the former is easier. This model, now being extended to higher secondary classes, creates artificial barriers that limit student potential rather than nurture it. The premise that students need 'easier' maths fundamentally misunderstands how mathematical competence develops — through challenge, struggle, and eventual mastery, not through diluted content.
The first flaw lies in the psychological impact of labelling. When students choose 'basic' Mathematics, they internalise a message about their limitations. This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, where reduced expectations lead to reduced achievement. Research consistently shows that high expectations coupled with appropriate support yield better outcomes than lowered standards disguised as accommodation.
As AI and technology permeate every sector — from agriculture to healthcare, finance to creative industries — mathematical literacy has never been more crucial. Today's students will enter a workforce where algorithmic thinking, data interpretation, and quantitative reasoning are fundamental skills, not optional extras. The CBSE's two-tier system creates a generation of artificially segregated students, leaving many unprepared for an increasingly quantitative world.
While India positions itself as a global technology hub, its premier educational board is creating pathways that detracts from mathematical proficiency. The 'basic' maths track reduces chances of a career in STEM, data science, economics and numerous other fields. This is particularly problematic given that many students will make these choices at 15-16 years of age, before they fully understand career implications or develop mature mathematical thinking.
The argument that students not pursuing Mathematics beyond Class X need only basic skills is flawed in our current context. Whether analysing insurance policies, understanding loan calculations, evaluating investment options, or simply being an informed citizen capable of interpreting statistical claims, comprehensive mathematical literacy is essential for everyone.
Countries leading international Mathematics assessments take notably different approaches. Singapore maintains a unified maths curriculum through secondary education. It teaches students mathematical concepts in a three-step learning process: Concrete, pictorial, and abstract, based on the work of American psychologist Jerome Bruner. Finland maintains a comprehensive Mathematics education without artificial streaming. Its approach focuses on collaborative learning environments where stronger students help weaker ones. The Korean revised school curriculum emphasises contextual learning so that students can grasp basic mathematical concepts and make connections with their everyday lives.
These countries understand that mathematical competence isn't fixed but develops through quality instruction, peer interaction, and persistent effort. Their success suggests that India's approach may be solving the wrong problem.
Building on a system already in place for Mathematics, CBSE will expand its dual-level subject options to Science for Class XI. The existing implementation in classes IX and X provides valuable insights into this policy's shortcomings. Rather than improving mathematical achievement broadly, it has created a two-tier system where students in the 'basic' track often struggle when attempting to transition to higher mathematics.
Under new guidelines, students who completed basic Mathematics will now be permitted to take Mathematics in Class XI, but the head of the institution must ensure that the student has the aptitude and ability. This requirement reveals the system's fundamental flaw — if students completing 'basic' Mathematics need special assessment to continue with standard Mathematics, the former is failing to prepare them adequately.
There are already reports suggesting that many students choose the basic track not because of inherent inability but due to inadequate support, poor teaching quality, or misguided counselling. The solution should be improving mathematical instruction for all students, not creating escape routes that limit opportunities.
Rather than institutionalising different expectations, the CBSE should focus on pedagogical improvements that help all students achieve mathematical competence. This includes investing in teacher training, developing better instructional materials, and creating support systems for struggling students. The goal should be to bring every student up to a high standard.
Mathematical education should prepare students for an uncertain future where quantitative literacy will be essential across professions. Creating artificial barriers through two-tier systems contradicts this imperative. In an era where mathematical literacy determines economic opportunity, India cannot afford to create artificial barriers to achievement. As a postgraduate in Mathematics, it is my conviction that it will be more prudent to abandon this misguided policy and commit to universal mathematical excellence.
The writer, a defence and cyber security analyst, is former country head of General Dynamics
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
an hour ago
- India.com
Even After U.S. Plea, Saudi Refused Defense Aid To Israel; Prince Salman Rejected Trump's Request Against Iran
Riyadh/Washington: A previously undisclosed standoff unfolded behind the scenes of the 12-day Iran-Israel war in June, as Saudi Arabia flatly refused a direct request from the United States to transfer its powerful American-made THAAD air defense systems to Israel, according to two senior U.S. defense officials cited by the Middle East Eye . At the height of the conflict, Iran had unleashed waves of advanced ballistic missiles, and Israel's stockpile of interceptor missiles, especially the high-altitude THAADs, was running dangerously low. Faced with the rapid depletion of its own interceptors like the Arrow and Patriot, the U.S. administration urgently reached out to Riyadh. But the response it got was immediate and firm. According to one official familiar with the internal deliberations, 'We were asking everyone to contribute. When that failed, we tried to negotiate. But this was not just about one country.' American officials tried to convince Saudi Arabia that Tehran was not only a threat to Israel; it posed a looming danger to Saudi national security as well. But the Saudis did not budge. Despite being fully capable of aiding Israel, the kingdom chose to prioritise its own defense. Saudi Arabia had already activated its THAAD systems in response to threats from Houthi rebels, with some units even deployed to guard the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. At one point during the war, Israeli defense officials were forced to let some incoming Iranian missiles fall on uninhabited areas as they rationed what little interceptor stock remained. U.S. think tanks had already flagged the issue in classified memos, highlighting Israel's supply of Arrow and Patriot systems was shrinking by the hour. Meanwhile, on July 3, nine days after a ceasefire between Iran and Israel, Saudi Arabia inaugurated a newly acquired THAAD battery from the United States, a move closely watched in Washington. Concerns were spiraling inside the Pentagon. The Guardian reported that the United States itself was down to just 25% of its Patriot interceptor reserves, and Pentagon planners were alarmed about whether America could even sustain its own global military posture if the Iran-Israel war escalated further. One American official told the Middle East Eye that internal projections showed a 'catastrophic depletion' of interceptors was imminent. In a desperate move, the United States tested its Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) from a Navy destroyer of the Arleigh Burke class to reinforce Israeli defenses. The Telegraph confirmed that Iran had already scored direct hits on five key Israeli military bases. The final twist came when The Wall Street Journal revealed that American officials had floated the idea of redirecting Saudi THAAD systems to Tel Aviv, but Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman rejected it outright. Washington then turned to the UAE with a similar request. Whether the Emirates complied remains unknown. No official confirmation has surfaced. The silence speaks volumes. As it stands, this behind-the-curtain episode exposes not only the limits of U.S. influence in the Gulf, but also the extent to which Saudi Arabia has begun charting its own course, even when it means defying its closest Western ally in the middle of a regional war.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
U.S., E.U. reach an 'across the board' agreement on tariffs
The United States and the European Union reached a tariff deal Sunday (July 27, 2025) after a brief meeting between President Donald Trump and European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen. A White House deadline was days away for imposing punishing import taxes on the 27-member E.U., which is America's leading global trading partner. 'It was a very interesting negotiation. I think it's going to be great for both parties,' Mr. Trump said. The make-or-break talks were meant to head off trade penalties — and promised retaliation from Europe — that could have sent shock waves through economies around the globe. Mr. Trump and Ms. Von der Leyen held private talks at one of Mr. Trump's golf courses in Scotland, then emerged a short time later saying they had reached an 'across the board' agreement. In remarks before the session, Mr. Trump pledged to change what he characterised as 'a very one-sided transaction, very unfair to the United States.' 'I think the main sticking point is fairness,' he said while also noting, 'We've had a hard time with trade with Europe, a very hard time.' Ms. Von der Leyen had said the U.S. and E.U. combined have the world's largest trade volume, encompassing hundreds of millions of people and trillions of dollars. Trump said the stakes involved meant of making a deal, 'We should give it a shot.' Ms. Von der Leyen said Mr. Trump was 'known as a tough negotiator and dealmaker' which caused the president to interject with 'but fair." She said that, if they are successful, 'I think it would be the biggest deal each of us has ever struck.' For months, Mr. Trump has threatened most of the world with large tariffs in hopes of shrinking major U.S. trade deficits with many key trading partners. More recently, he had hinted that any deal with the EU would have to 'buy down' the currently scheduled tariff rate of 30%. The Republican president pointed to a recent U.S. agreement with Japan that set tariff rates for many goods at 15% and suggested the E.U. could agree to something similar. Asked if he would be willing to accept tariff rates lower than that, Mr. Trump said 'no.' As for the threat of retaliation from the Europeans, he said: 'They'll do what they have to do.' Their meeting came after Mr. Trump played golfed for the second straight day at his Turnberry course, this time with a group that included sons Eric and Donald Jr. The President's five-day visit to Scotland is built around golf and promoting properties bearing his name. A small group of demonstrators at the course waved American flags and raised a sign criticizing British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who plans his own Turnberry meeting with Mr. Trump on Monday. Other voices could be heard cheering and chanting 'Trump! Trump!' as he played nearby. On Tuesday, Mr. Trump will be in Aberdeen, in northeastern Scotland, where his family has another golf course and is opening a third next month. The President and his sons plan to help cut the ribbon on the new course. Joining Ms. Von der Leyen were Maros Sefcovic, the E.U.'s chief trade negotiator; Björn Seibert, the head of Ms. Von der Leyen's Cabinet; Sabine Weyand, the commission's directorate-general for trade, and Tomas Baert, head of the trade and agriculture at the EU's delegation to the US. The deadline for the Mr. Trump administration to begin imposing tariffs has shifted in recent weeks but was now firm, the administration insisted. 'No extensions, no more grace periods. August 1, the tariffs are set, they'll go into place, Customs will start collecting the money and off we go," US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told 'Fox News Sunday.' He added, however, that even after that 'people can still talk to President Trump. I mean, he's always willing to listen.' Without an agreement, the EU said it was prepared to retaliate with tariffs on hundreds of American products, ranging from beef and auto parts to beer and Boeing airplanes. If Mr. Trump eventually made good on his threat of tariffs against Europe, it could meant that everything from French cheese and Italian leather goods to German electronics and Spanish pharmaceuticals would be more expensive in the United States. The U.S. and Britain, meanwhile, announced a trade framework in May and a larger agreement last month during the Group of Seven meeting in Canada. Mr. Trump says that deal is concluded and that he and Mr. Starmer will discuss other matters — though the White House has suggested it still needs some polishing.
India Today
2 hours ago
- India Today
US, EU seal trade framework after Trump's tariff talks with top European leader
The United States and the European Union have agreed on a new trade deal, announced by former President Donald Trump on Sunday. Under the new framework, a 15% tariff will be applied to EU goods entering the US. In return, the EU has agreed to buy large amounts of American energy products and military equipment. However, the 15% tariff is still seen as a disappointing outcome for Europe, especially since the EU had initially hoped for a "zero-for-zero" deal—no tariffs on either side. Still, the current deal is better than the earlier threat of a 30% tariff, which had alarmed European leaders and Commission President Ursula von der Leyen travelled to Scotland to meet Trump and finalise the agreement. Her visit was crucial in sealing the deal at the last minute. This is a developing story.- Ends
