The Unification Initiative: A Paradox? In addressing the problems generated by the diverse streams, the State has opted for a solution of reintegrating all the diverse under the NEP 2010. This reintegration (as per the language used in the NEP) first and foremost means reintegrating the diverse ingredients in the course structure of the systems. As such, it seems only pertinent that the word curriculum be deciphered first. The success of Inclusion of students from diverse backgrounds to a common structure is seen to be connected to the curriculum, since curricula often create significant barriers to learning. These barriers are related to a number of interconnected parts of the curriculum such as content, language of teaching, classroom management, learning styles and paces, and assessment methods and techniques.139 In that respect, under the NEP ‘curriculum’ has been considered in a narrow sense, where it refers to planned teaching and learning opportunities which are available in classroom and in the school. 140 The curriculum includes the content of the overall syllabus that is imparted to the students by various teaching and learning experiences. Therefore, while formulating a uniform course structure /syllabus, one of the fundamental considerations must be that it will consider the capacity, adaptability and acceptability of every stream the syllabus seeks to address. However, under the proposed reform, all the primary level students will be obliged to study some common courses. This will be in addition to the courses that are specific for the particular stream. Therefore, in a sense we can say that the Board curriculum students will continue having the same course structure whereas the madrassa and English medium students will have some additional mandatory subjects supposedly creating some extra academic pressure on these children only. This unification process will render a blanket unification disregarding the needs and adaptability of particular streams. The madrassa and English medium students are subjected to the changes, it is as if their obligation to accept the change should they want to belong to a common unified 139 Väyrynen (n 102) p.4 ibid p.4 140 Page | 51