An Indian prime minister in the past had loved children. The present prime minister has turned his own concern for children sitting for their board examinations into a system of mentoring from the top at an annual event. This year it was the seventh time that Narendra Modi met Central Board of Secondary Examination candidates in his ‘Pariksha Pe Charcha’ to suggest ways of lightening examination stress, to answer the children’s questions and, presumably, to inspire and thrill them with his presence. Mr Modi also feels it incumbent upon himself to instruct parents and teachers in the art of guiding students, no doubt because his experience is an example for children and adults alike. To join this event, in person or virtually, schools have to get their students, teachers and guardians registered. Apparently, Mr Modi and his government were not happy with the attendance of about 38 lakh last year, so they ensured registrations of up to 2.26 crore this time. Schools were told by CBSE officials that failing to increase the number of registrations may cause problems with affiliation later. The portent was inescapable. Also, that execution would be better than excuses — a phraseology suggesting that the order was not for educational institutions but for beholden subjects.

The purpose of turning Mr Modi’s declared concern for children into a threatening and coercive programme may have sprung from the urge to show the world and the nation how great a leader and mentor he was. In the process, the government displayed its disrespect for education and educational institutions, for teachers and parents. Neither were young people worthy of respect; they were not permitted to make their own assessments and choices. The programme is not academic but mentoring from an external source, and that, too, from a ruling politician. This time it fell just before the general elections. Many youngsters will be turning 18 soon and by registering, they have submitted their contact details. Would the government find that useful? Parents, too, might feel grateful to a leader who addressed their wards’ apprehensions. So the coercion this time may have had multiple functions. Whatever they may be, the government’s attitude exposed its disrespect for people’s freedom to choose, its disdain for education, and its routine use of force and fear to achieve its ends.