Talk:English Education Act 1835

Untitled
I think this relates to India. Kurando | ^_^ 12:37, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

The text here is confused and seems to be taken out of context from this blog which states:

".. British administrators forbade the teaching of English as a language outside of English-medium schools. By the 1835 English Education act, the teaching of English was taken out of native language schools – because learning English as a language, while retaining the native medium of education would allow the natives to understand the British on their own (native) terms. This is because a native brought up thinking in their own language and merely learning English as a foreign language, would be able to objectively study the British, outside of the colonial framework presented to them as objective and neutral. Thus the change of medium, and the establishment in the native mind of an English based class structure, was a necessary part of the colonizing mission."

In other words, the Act introduced (or encouraged?... enforced?) English as a medium of instruction, but banned the teaching of English in schools which used a native language as the medium of instruction. See also. A more authoritative source is needed to improve this entry... meanwhile perhaps people could work on other articles on the history of education in Britain and India generally, as there isn't very much. S. Cameron. 81.179.72.43 21:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

English medium education
Please look up this page on Wiki and add to the India section please!Eog1916 09:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Complete rewrite
Previous version led off with statement that the Act was a UK Act of Parliament (which it wasn't), went on to talk of Act suppressing things, which it will be clear from the text it did very little of, and gave no hint that it was backtracked from rapidly. There was also a fair amount of unfair conjecture about British motives; the Whigs were world class at having noble intentions, and no grasp of the possible consequences of acting upon them, and that seems a simpler explanation.Rjccumbria (talk) 22:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

NPOV removed
The article changed significantly since Dec. 2007, I've removed the NPOV template, please use or better yet  for statements and detail issues here. This will help address them quickly. - RoyBoy 03:55, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

About Me!!!!!
I love writing my own songs and try to sing them to people! I wish i would take gigs to sing my songs to u and be famous! I really want everyone to make me a happy person by making me a famous person and have a lot of fans! — Preceding unsigned comment added by KaseyHaines (talk • contribs) 22:59, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Cleanup required
The opening sentence of this article (and indeed much of the lead) is ungrammatical and illiterate gibberish, so much so that I can't even begin to guess at the intended meaning. Could someone who knows a bit about the topic kindly tidy it up a bit? Thanks. GrindtXX (talk) 18:38, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Lord Macaulay's address to British Parliament on Feb 2, 1835. Is it a hoax?
There is a Macaulay quotation that is quite damaging and that is being circulated on the Internet.

The Macaulay quote is apparently an internet hoax. See these sites:

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Thomas_Babington_Macaulay,_1st_Baron_Macaulay

http://koenraadelst.voiceofdharma.com/articles/hinduism/macaulay.html

The wrong quote is: "I have travelled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in the country, such high moral values, people of such caliber, that I do not think we would conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self esteem, their native culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation."

I have seen this quote in the form of a photocopy of a newspaper clipping that looks genuine at link:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=588576687850480&set=a.588577977850351.1073741826.100000944613233&type=1&theater

I am grateful for anyone who can update the Wiki article confirming that this is a truthful quote or a hoax. Thank you in advance.

ContemporaryOne

Absolute Lack of neutrality
I mean, just look at the introductory paragraph. This reads more like propaganda than an article. Someone please rewrite it. WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A SOAPBOX LeiKera02 (talk) 05:14, 5 September 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.61.210.64 (talk) 15:15, 30 August 2020 (UTC)