The University Grants Commission’s (UGC) proposed undergraduate mathematics curriculum, introduced under the framework of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, has triggered a wave of criticism from the academic community. More than 900 mathematicians and scholars, including Padma awardees and Bhatnagar laureates, have signed a petition highlighting what they describe as serious flaws in the draft. According to the petitioners, the document not only undermines core areas of mathematics but also neglects applied branches that are essential for modern education and research. They argue that if implemented in its current form, the curriculum could weaken India’s scientific foundation and compromise higher education standards.

Concerns over sidelining of core subjects

One of the primary objections raised by experts is the perceived marginalization of fundamental mathematical disciplines. The petition points out that key areas traditionally considered central to undergraduate training have been either diluted or omitted altogether. Scholars argue that such omissions could leave students ill-prepared for advanced studies or research in mathematics and related fields.

Exclusion of applied mathematics

Another major criticism centers on the absence of applied mathematics from the proposed framework. Applied mathematics plays a crucial role in bridging theoretical concepts with real-world applications across science, engineering, economics, and technology. By excluding this component, experts believe the draft risks creating a gap between academic learning and practical problem-solving skills that are vital in today’s interdisciplinary landscape.

Outdated inclusions raise eyebrows

The petition also highlights what it describes as outdated or irrelevant topics included in the draft syllabus. Critics argue that these inclusions reflect a lack of alignment with global academic standards and advancements in mathematical research. Such choices, they warn, could hinder students’ competitiveness on an international level and reduce opportunities for collaboration with global institutions.

Bizarre references questioned

In addition to structural concerns, experts have flagged unusual references within the draft document that they consider inappropriate for an undergraduate curriculum. These references have been described as “bizarre” by petitioners, who suggest they undermine both academic rigor and credibility. Scholars emphasize that a national-level framework should be carefully curated to reflect intellectual integrity and scholarly consensus.

Call for withdrawal and redrafting

Given these issues, the signatories are urging authorities to withdraw the current draft entirely and initiate a fresh redrafting process led by qualified mathematicians with expertise across diverse subfields. They stress that such an approach is necessary to safeguard India’s educational standards while ensuring students receive training aligned with contemporary scientific needs.

The controversy surrounding the UGC’s draft curriculum underscores broader debates about how educational reforms should balance tradition with innovation under NEP 2020. While reform is widely welcomed, experts insist that any new framework must be developed through rigorous consultation with subject specialists to maintain academic excellence and global relevance. The outcome of this debate will likely shape not only mathematics education but also India’s long-term scientific trajectory.