In a bold move to defend their academic freedom, Harvard University has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, challenging the federal government’s freeze on over $2.2 billion (approx. ₹18,350 crore) in grants. The funding block was enacted after Harvard refused to comply with sweeping demands that included curbing student activism, overhauling leadership, and auditing campus views on diversity and inclusion.

Filed in a federal court in Boston, Harvard’s lawsuit argues that the freeze violates its First Amendment rights, as well as provisions under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the Administrative Procedure Act. The university has called the move “arbitrary and capricious,” citing the significant damage it could cause to ongoing research efforts across medicine, technology, and national security.

In its filing, the university stated, “The Government has not — and cannot — identify any rational connection between antisemitism concerns and the medical, scientific, technological, and other research it has frozen.” The administration’s actions, Harvard added, threaten not just its own academic integrity but the autonomy of American universities as a whole.

The standoff began after the Trump administration issued a letter on April 11, 2025, demanding that Harvard implement stricter disciplinary measures on campus protesters, reform its admissions process, revoke recognition of certain student clubs, and audit faculty and students for political diversity. It also urged the university to screen international students for “hostility to American values.”

Harvard President Alan Garber responded firmly, refusing to compromise on the institution’s independence. “We stand for the truth that universities can fulfill their essential role in society without improper government intrusion,” he stated in a message to the Harvard community.

Advertisement

Following Harvard’s public defiance, the administration quickly enacted the funding freeze. Trump himself took to his Truth Social platform to question whether the university should lose its tax-exempt status, accusing it of promoting “political, ideological, and terrorist-inspired” views.

Support for Harvard’s legal action has come from several quarters. The American Council on Education, which represents over 1,600 higher education institutions, commended the lawsuit, calling it a necessary defence of scholarship and scientific research. “We applaud Harvard for taking this step and look forward to a clear and unambiguous statement by the court rebuking efforts to undermine academic integrity,” said council president Ted Mitchell.

Anurima Bhargava, a Harvard alumna and civil rights advocate, added, “This is a reckless and unlawful attempt at power and control. Harvard has once again stood firm against dangerous and escalating demands.”

This legal battle marks one of the most high-profile confrontations between higher education and the federal government in recent times. At its core lies the question of whether public funding can be used as leverage to reshape the ideological and governance structures of academic institutions—a precedent that could have implications far beyond Harvard.

As the case unfolds, educators and students around the world will be watching closely. In a time when the autonomy of educational institutions is increasingly under scrutiny, Harvard’s lawsuit could become a defining moment in the global conversation on academic freedom.

(This article has been generated with supporting information as reported by The Hindu)

Advertisement

“You cannot teach a hungry child,” said Donald Bundy, one of the world’s foremost school nutrition experts. Yet the gap between education and nutrition literacy is wider than we’d like to admit.

According to the 2025 Global Education Monitoring Report, only 60% of countries have any form of teacher training on nutrition within their national policies. And when it comes to actual implementation? That number drops even further in low-income regions. This silent gap in our education system is not just about school meals—it’s about a missing pedagogy that influences how students think, behave, and learn.

Why Teacher Training in Nutrition Matters

We often discuss nutrition as a public health issue. But nutrition is equally an educational concern—and teachers are at its frontline. Unfortunately, as the report points out, only 27% of global school meal programmes employ trained nutritionists to support meal design or delivery. In such scenarios, teachers unknowingly become the default guides on what’s “healthy”—without any professional preparation.

This is problematic on two fronts. First, without foundational training, teachers may unintentionally reinforce poor food habits or remain unequipped to link nutrition with classroom performance. Second, their lack of training undermines the full impact of initiatives like PM POSHAN (India’s flagship school meal scheme) or garden-based learning efforts.

As the GEM report underscores, “Learning about nutrition requires intentional integration of school meal delivery with nutrition education, careful assessment of nutritional intakes, and monitoring and research around shaping healthy eating habits.”

Advertisement

The Global Picture: Policy, But No Practice

In a policy mapping across 68 countries, nutrition education was often included in school curricula, but teacher training remained sporadic and weak. High-income countries reported only 58% coverage, and low-income countries—despite facing the brunt of malnutrition—had to depend on NGOs, development partners, or overburdened community workers to plug the gap.

Even where policies exist, operational challenges persist. For example, in India, while most rural schools under PM POSHAN serve mid-day meals, only 18% of schools reported daily on meal access due to low engagement with real-time tracking systems (Kapur et al., 2023). With such inconsistent reporting, training teachers to monitor, educate, and flag issues becomes all the more critical.

From Curriculum to Cafeteria: The Case for ‘Nutrition Pedagogy’

The report introduces a powerful idea: that food literacy must be embedded in formal, informal, and non-formal learning. This includes not only textbook-based curriculum but also experiential learning—like cooking classes, food label literacy, or classroom discussions around body image and media portrayal.

Yet, without empowered educators, these remain half-baked concepts.

Take this line from the report:

“Nutrition education has become a cornerstone of school health initiatives worldwide, designed to instil habits that endure for life.”

That longevity depends on consistent adult role models—especially teachers—who understand both the science of food and the psychology of student behaviour. It’s not just about knowing what to teach but how to teach it sensitively, especially during adolescence when issues like body image, peer pressure, and social media influence food choices deeply.

Advertisement

A Missed Opportunity in Pre-Service Education

In a rather concerning statistic, the report reveals that in 2022, only 14% of countries adequately covered the topic of infant and child nutrition in the pre-service curriculum for doctors, nurses, and midwives. If this is the case for healthcare professionals, it raises an important question—how many B.Ed or teacher training colleges meaningfully cover food, nutrition, and health in their pedagogy courses?

This is where reform is urgently needed. Nutrition training must be embedded into teacher education institutions, not offered as an afterthought in in-service workshops.

What Needs to Change?

The report outlines three major shifts that could address this blind spot:

1. Develop a structured nutrition module for pre-service teacher education.

2. Integrate nutrition literacy into school improvement plans and co-curricular activities.

3. Collaborate across departments—from health to agriculture—to support interdisciplinary teacher training.

Some countries are showing the way. Finland’s food education programme, for instance, includes school meals, nutrition classes, and teacher-led discussions on sustainability, right from primary to vocational levels. It’s time more countries, especially India, followed suit—not just in policy, but in practice.

The Bottom Line

To feed a child is to free their mind. But in schools today, we are expecting teachers to do this job without giving them the training they need. It’s akin to asking someone to teach coding without a computer.

As we march toward the goals of NEP 2020 and SDG 4, we must recognise that education and nutrition are not parallel pursuits—they are intertwined pathways. And it begins not in the cafeteria, but in the staffroom.

In line with the implementation of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, a significant curriculum reform has been rolled out in Chhattisgarh, where CBSE and NCERT have introduced a mandatory bridge course for students from Classes 6 to 12, starting from the academic session 2025–26.

This strategic change aims to strengthen conceptual understanding, sharpen skills, and enhance subject connectivity for students transitioning between academic years. The bridge course is designed as a foundational segment to reinforce key learnings from the previous class, enabling smoother adaptation to new academic content—especially in subjects like Mathematics, Science, Social Science, and Languages.

What is a Bridge Course?

A bridge course is essentially a learning support module that helps students revise and reinforce previous class concepts before delving into the new syllabus. By bridging the learning gap, it prepares students mentally and academically for the demands of their new grade. The initiative is particularly aimed at strengthening continuity in learning and reducing academic stress.

Teacher Training and Implementation

To ensure effective integration, teachers in CBSE-affiliated schools across Chhattisgarh are undergoing dedicated training in both online and offline formats. The training focuses on how to incorporate the bridge course within the regular curriculum and adapt pedagogy to meet individual learner needs.

Changes in NCERT Textbooks

Alongside the bridge course implementation, NCERT has revised textbooks for Classes 3 and 6. The new editions lay emphasis on activity-based learning, life skills development, and project work. In particular, the Class 6 Science and Social Science books feature innovative activities and experiential modules aimed at enhancing student engagement and practical understanding.

Advertisement

With this move, CBSE and NCERT aim to create a more inclusive and progressive academic structure, staying true to NEP 2020’s vision of competency-based learning and reduced content load. As this model takes shape in Chhattisgarh, it could serve as a blueprint for nationwide adoption in the coming years.

In a significant move towards enhancing teacher capacity in alignment with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) has issued fresh guidelines mandating 50 hours of annual training for all educators in its affiliated schools. The 2025 annual training theme has been declared as STEM Education, reflecting India’s push towards innovation-driven learning.

According to CBSE notifications TRG-2/2025 and TRG-3/2025, 25 hours of training must be delivered by CBSE or a recognised government training body, while the remaining 25 hours can be conducted in-house or at the school complex level. This framework has been structured in line with the National Professional Standards for Teachers (NPST) and aims to ensure continuous professional development and improved student learning outcomes.

The CPD (Continuous Professional Development) hours are categorised as follows:

• Core Values and Ethics – 12 hours

• Knowledge and Practice – 24 hours

• Professional Growth and Development – 14 hours

CBSE has also clarified that academic responsibilities such as assessment duties for board exams, practical examiner roles, content creation, curriculum review, and participation in CBSE-led conferences will be recognised as valid CPD hours.

The board has instructed schools to organise District Level Deliberations (DLDs) focused on STEM pedagogy. These sessions are designed to encourage peer discussions, sharing of best practices, and localisation of innovative teaching strategies.

Advertisement

Heads of institutions have been called upon to act as leaders of change, ensuring the effective implementation of this framework within their schools and nurturing a culture of continuous learning.

With this move, CBSE reaffirms its commitment to building a future-ready teaching workforce, equipped to deliver education that is both engaging and globally relevant.

🔗 More details here

China has unveiled a comprehensive education reform strategy aiming to integrate artificial intelligence (AI) across all levels of its education system. This initiative is a cornerstone of the nation’s broader “Strong Education Nation” plan, targeting significant advancements in educational quality and innovation by 2035.

The Ministry of Education announced plans to embed AI applications into teaching methodologies, textbooks, and curricula spanning primary, secondary, and higher education. This move is designed to cultivate essential skills such as independent thinking, problem-solving, communication, and collaboration among students and educators. By fostering these competencies, China aims to enhance the core competitiveness of its innovative talent pool (Reuters).

This AI integration aligns with China’s broader educational blueprint, jointly issued by the Communist Party of China Central Committee and the State Council. The plan outlines a two-phased objective: establishing a high-quality educational system by 2027 and achieving global leadership in education by 2035. Key goals include expanding free education, increasing enrollment in high-quality undergraduate and postgraduate programs, and addressing regional disparities in educational access.

To support this vision, Chinese universities are expanding AI-related courses and enrollment. Institutions like Peking University and Shanghai Jiao Tong University have announced plans to increase undergraduate spots in fields such as information science, engineering, and AI. This expansion is closely linked to the national strategy of developing a robust digital-era talent pool (Reuters Education Expansion).

Moreover, the Ministry of Education has mandated that primary and secondary schools intensify their science education to drive scientific and technological innovation. Schools are required to implement comprehensive science curricula, enhance teaching capabilities, and integrate science education resources effectively. 

Advertisement

China’s commitment to integrating AI into education reflects its broader ambition to become a global leader in technological innovation and education. By embedding AI into the fabric of its educational system, China aims to prepare its citizens for the challenges and opportunities of the digital age.

In a sweeping inspection drive aimed at curbing malpractice in private educational institutions, the Delhi Government has inspected over 600 schools across the national capital, issuing show-cause notices to more than 10 schools and initiating the process of derecognition in serious cases. The crackdown follows mounting complaints from parents about arbitrary fee hikes, dummy admissions, and neglect of Economically Weaker Section (EWS) students.

The Directorate of Education (DoE) formed district-level committees—headed by Sub-Divisional Magistrates (SDMs) and comprising deputy directors of education, accounts officers, and principals of government schools—to investigate complaints on a priority basis. These inspections are being closely monitored, with more schools likely to be reviewed in the coming days.

The inspection drive also revealed that 20 schools were allegedly engaging in dummy admissions—a practice where students are enrolled only on paper while attending private coaching institutes instead of regular classes. In such cases, the government has invoked provisions under the Delhi School Education Act and Rules (DSEAR), 1973, and has begun derecognition procedures.

Chief Minister Rekha Gupta, responding to concerns raised during a Jan Samvaad public hearing, stated, “It is completely unacceptable for any school to mentally harass parents or students, threaten expulsion, or raise fees without due process.” She reaffirmed the government’s commitment to transparency, accountability, and ensuring access to quality education for every child.

The DoE confirmed that some schools have also failed to submit mandatory financial disclosures and fee statements as per Section 17(3) and Section 180(3) of DSEAR, which will invite legal action. Schools violating EWS guidelines—such as failing to provide free textbooks, uniforms, and writing materials under Rule 8 of the Delhi RTE Rules—are also under scrutiny.

Advertisement

The crackdown also comes after Queen Mary School in Model Town was accused of fee-related misconduct and expulsion threats. The Chief Minister had instructed the education department to take immediate action against such institutions, promising a “zero-tolerance” approach.

Delhi’s education authorities have reiterated that private schools must adhere strictly to rules governing fee regulation, student welfare, and inclusive access. Institutions found guilty of flouting these norms will face stringent penalties, including derecognition and possible takeover of management.

Amid growing parental concerns about rising school fees and student expulsions, Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta has issued a stern warning to private schools across the capital. Emphasising a “zero tolerance” approach, the CM stated that any institution found violating rules—whether by imposing arbitrary fee hikes or harassing students and parents—will face strict action.

Addressing media following a public dialogue programme on Tuesday, Gupta shared that her office had received multiple complaints from concerned parents alleging wrongful fee practices and threats of expulsion. One such case involved Queen Mary School in Model Town, where families accused the school of unjust fee collection and punitive action against students.

“No school has the authority to harass parents or children, threaten expulsion, or hike fees arbitrarily,” said Gupta in a statement to ANI. “There are rules and laws in place. Compliance is not optional—it’s mandatory.”

The Chief Minister confirmed that notices have already been issued to several schools named in formal complaints. She further stated that relevant officials have been directed to conduct immediate investigations and take necessary legal and disciplinary action.

Taking to X (formerly Twitter), Gupta reiterated the Delhi Government’s stand on education, writing,

Advertisement

“The Delhi Government is fully committed to transparency, equal opportunity, and the protection of children’s rights in education. A zero-tolerance policy has been adopted towards any kind of injustice, exploitation, or irregularity—no laxity will be tolerated in this. Our resolve is clear—every child should have access to justice, respect, and quality education.”

VIDEO | Delhi CM Rekha Gupta (@gupta_rekha) on the issue of fee hike by some private schools, says, “Parents have been meeting me with their grievances… that is for sure… no school has any right to harass parents and children. They have no right to threaten children and hike… pic.twitter.com/QqGTYHrf7r

— Press Trust of India (@PTI_News) April 15, 2025

The Chief Minister’s response signals a growing shift toward regulatory vigilance in private education, especially around affordability and student welfare. As rising school fees become a point of national concern, particularly after a recent survey reported a 50–80% hike across schools in three years, Delhi’s move to crack down on irregularities could serve as a template for other states to follow.

15 April 2025: In a step to move towards equitable education, the Mahatma Jyotiba Phule Research & Training Institute (MAHAJYOTI), an autonomous body under the Government of Maharashtra, is set to distribute free study materials to over 7,000 students from Other Backward Classes (OBC) under its Pustak Sanch Watap Yojana. The initiative aims to aid students in preparing for competitive exams such as JEE, NEET, and MHT-CET.

Beneficiaries—spread across all 36 districts of Maharashtra—have registered under MAHAJYOTI’s training programmes and will receive comprehensive preparation books for their respective entrance examinations. The Jalgaon region saw the highest number of registrations, followed by Amravati, Dhule, Buldhana, and Ahmednagar.

This large-scale effort underscores MAHAJYOTI’s ongoing mission to empower students from OBC, Deprived Castes-Nomadic Tribes, and Special Backward Classes by ensuring they are not left behind in the pursuit of higher education due to economic constraints.

Voices from the Government and Ground

Honourable Minister Atul Save, from the Other Backward and Bahujan Welfare Department, commended the scale of the scheme, stating,

Advertisement

“It is inspiring to witness the tremendous response from students. Our commitment to providing such opportunities for OBC students remains steadfast. We strongly encourage them to leverage these important government initiatives designed for their progress.”

Echoing his sentiments, Shri Prashant Wawge, Managing Director of MAHAJYOTI, remarked,

“This overwhelming response reinforces our mission. We urge every eligible OBC student to take full advantage of this scheme. We wish these bright young minds success in their entrance examinations.”

Changing Lives One Book at a Time

Families of beneficiaries have also expressed heartfelt gratitude. Kiran Nimje, mother of Aaryan from Nagpur, shared,

“Purchasing expensive JEE books was beyond our means. This scheme has been a lifeline. My son, who scored 94% in SSC, can now prepare for engineering with confidence.”

Similarly, Sheetal Nagargoje from Amravati, whose son Aditya also benefited, added,

“We are incredibly thankful. This support came to us at the right time and will help my son, who scored 80% in SSC, get closer to his dream.”

As education costs continue to rise, especially in the realm of competitive exam preparation, government-supported initiatives like MAHAJYOTI’s book distribution scheme play a pivotal role in bridging the opportunity gap for students from marginalised communities. With a robust outreach and strong public response, this programme is a timely reminder that access to quality education must remain a priority.

Advertisement

In response to Harvard’s refusal to implement federal directives on campus reforms, the Trump administration has escalated the standoff by freezing $2.2 billion (approximately ₹18,400 crore) in multi-year federal grants and placing an additional $60 million (₹500 crore) in government contracts on hold. This latest move by the Joint Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism underscores the growing pressure on educational institutions to align with the administration’s ideological agenda—an act Harvard deems incompatible with its constitutional rights and academic independence.

At the heart of the issue lies the Trump administration’s crackdown on elite American universities, particularly those perceived to support diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives or tolerate anti-establishment student protests. The administration’s sweeping ultimatum to Harvard included banning face masks on campus, altering hiring and admission practices to favour so-called “merit-based” criteria, and conducting an audit of students and faculty based on their ideological leanings.

“No Government Should Dictate What Universities Teach”

In a strongly-worded letter to the Harvard community, President Alan Garber reaffirmed the university’s constitutional rights, asserting that “no government—regardless of which party is in power—should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue.”

He called the demands unconstitutional and a breach of the First Amendment, stating they “exceed the statutory limits of the government’s authority under Title VI.” Harvard, he emphasised, would not “surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.”

This decision has not been made lightly. With $9 billion (₹75,060 crore) in federal support hanging in the balance—including student financial aid and research grants—the refusal signals the university’s unwavering commitment to preserving academic integrity, even in the face of substantial financial risk.

What’s At Stake for Students and Global Academia?

Harvard’s resistance is more than a domestic headline—it’s a global signal. With Indian students being among the top international communities at Harvard and other elite US institutions, the outcome of this standoff could have ripple effects far beyond American borders.

Advertisement

According to The Hindu, the Trump administration has already frozen approximately $2.3 billion (₹19,182 crore) in funding to institutions like Princeton, Cornell, Columbia, and the University of Pennsylvania. The latter’s funding was slashed over allowing a transgender athlete to compete—a move many have labelled discriminatory and ideologically driven.

For students—especially those pursuing higher education abroad—this moment marks a sobering reminder that education can no longer be viewed as an apolitical space. If universities are pressured to reshape their curriculums, hiring practices, or student bodies based on political whims, the very essence of critical thinking, academic exploration, and diversity is endangered.

The administration’s justification for defunding Harvard cites that many DEI initiatives are “divisive” or “discriminatory”—a claim widely rejected by educators, human rights groups, and civil society organisations across the globe.

The truth is: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion are not trends or PR jargon—they are the moral and pedagogical backbone of an equitable education system. To see these stripped down as ideological threats marks a dangerous precedent not just for the U.S., but for any democracy flirting with majoritarian education policies.

The Bigger Picture

By refusing to accept the U.S. government’s conditions, Harvard has taken a stance to defend its institutional autonomy. While this may lead to financial strain, the university has signalled that it will not compromise on its core governance principles.

As Indian universities navigate reforms under the National Education Policy (NEP), this development also serves as a timely reminder of the importance of safeguarding academic spaces from excessive external influence. Educational institutions function best when given the space to operate independently and uphold their academic mandates without undue interference.

Advertisement

Decisions about what constitutes academic freedom or institutional policy should ideally be made within the education system—not defined by political narratives.

Rather than setting a precedent for others to replicate, this moment should prompt global institutions and governments to reflect carefully on the balance between public accountability and institutional independence.

In today’s fast-evolving education landscape, a school is no longer just about lessons and exams—it is about ensuring student safety, holistic development, mental well-being, career clarity, and inclusive practices. Recognising this, the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) has mandated the formation of specific committees in all affiliated schools to ensure a structured, student-centric, and responsive ecosystem. But the question is—is your school actually following these norms?

Why Are These Committees Crucial?

These committees aren’t just bureaucratic formalities—they are foundational for building schools that are safe, progressive, and future-ready. In an era where bullying, cyber threats, mental health issues, learning differences, and safety concerns are on the rise, these mechanisms act as the backbone of accountability and action. They allow stakeholders—students, parents, teachers, and management—to work together for an environment where every child can thrive.

Let’s look at the mandatory CBSE committees that every school must have:

1. School Management Committee (SMC)

This is the apex decision-making body comprising management, educators, parents, and external experts. It ensures that school policies align with CBSE affiliation by-laws.

2. Sexual Harassment Committee/Internal Complaints Committee

Formed as per the POSH Act, this committee safeguards staff and students from workplace harassment and ensures timely redressal.

Advertisement

3. Child Protection Committee

It includes representatives from all key stakeholders and ensures children are protected from abuse and neglect within the school environment.

4. School Discipline Committee

This committee deals with discipline-related issues and works towards fostering a respectful school culture.

5. Grievance Redressal Committee

Handles complaints from students, staff, or parents, ensuring a transparent and fair resolution mechanism.

6. Anti-Bullying Committee

Bullying in any form is non-negotiable. This committee ensures strict implementation of CBSE’s anti-bullying policies.

7. Health & Wellness Committee

Includes physical education teachers and health professionals, focusing on physical, emotional, and mental well-being.

8. Examination Committee

Manages all assessment protocols and ensures fair, secure conduct of exams.

Advertisement

9. Inclusive Education/Special Needs Committee

Supports children with disabilities and learning challenges by providing resources, accommodations, and inclusive policies.

10. Career Guidance & Counseling Committee

Empowers students with career counselling, aptitude testing, and psychological support.

11. Academic Committee

Looks after curriculum implementation, quality of teaching, and subject integration.

12. House System Committee

Encourages inter-house competitions and leadership among students through structured activities.

13. Cultural & Co-curricular Activities Committee

Ensures students get opportunities beyond the classroom—through arts, debate, sports, etc.

14. IT & Innovation Committee

Encourages integration of digital learning, coding, innovation, and tech-based pedagogies.

15. Disaster Management Committee

Prepares schools for emergencies like fire, earthquakes, or health outbreaks.

16. Parent-Teacher Association (PTA)

While not mandatory, many schools voluntarily include this for seamless parent-teacher collaboration.

Why Every Educator and Parent Should Care

These committees represent a school’s commitment to child-centred learning. Schools that implement them honestly often see lower dropout rates, improved mental health indicators, stronger student voices, and higher parental trust.

With NEP 2020 pushing for holistic education, these structures ensure that the vision turns into action. It’s not just about compliance—it’s about creating a school that every child looks forward to attending.

What Else Can Be Added?

While CBSE has outlined a solid framework, here are 3 additional committees that could be introduced:

1. Digital Safety & Cyber Etiquette Committee – With rising online exposure, schools must ensure students are protected digitally.

2. Student Voice & Leadership Committee – Giving students formal roles to co-create school culture.

3. Sustainability & Environment Committee – For green practices, waste segregation, water conservation, and LiFE-aligned actions.

In 2025, education isn’t just about marks—it’s about mindset, safety, values, and vision. As parents, educators, or students, it’s our right (and duty) to ask: Does our school have these committees? Because compliance is the first step to care.