The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 has emerged as a topic of intense debate in India, evoking diverse opinions and perspectives. With its vision of transforming the country's education system, the NEP has sparked discussions on various aspects, including curriculum reforms, language policy, privatisation, and inclusivity.
Lata Vaidyanathan, educationist and Director of Gyan Bharati School talks to the Probe’s Naziya Perveen on NEP.
Proponents of the NEP argue that the policy introduces significant curriculum reforms, emphasising critical thinking, problem-solving skills, and a multidisciplinary approach. They contend that the NEP promotes a more holistic and practical learning experience, fostering creativity and innovation among students. Advocates assert that the focus on skill development and vocational education will equip learners with employable abilities, aligning education with industry requirements.
However, critics express concerns about the implementation of these reforms. They argue that the NEP's emphasis on skill development might undervalue foundational knowledge and neglect the importance of a well-rounded education. Furthermore, there are apprehensions about the readiness of the education system to effectively deliver these reforms, including the availability of trained teachers and adequate infrastructure.
Superficial Stakeholder Engagement
The National Education Policy (NEP) introduced by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government in 2020 was touted as a transformative roadmap for education in India. However, the government's failure to adequately consult all stakeholders during the policy's formulation raised significant concerns about its inclusivity, legitimacy, and potential impact on the education system.
While the consultation process did take place, some critics argue that it was not extensive enough or that certain groups were not adequately represented in the process. While the government claims to have engaged stakeholders, the process can be best described as superficial. The consultation was marred by limited outreach, insufficient time for deliberation, and inadequate representation of marginalized communities, teachers' unions, and student bodies.
4 Year Undergraduate Programme Feasible?
The four-year undergraduate program proposed in the NEP has received criticism on several fronts as it leads to a mismatch and disruption with the existing three-year UG program. Introducing a 4-year UG program could increase the financial burden on students and their families. An extra year of education would entail additional costs, including tuition fees, accommodation, and living expenses. This could particularly impact students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds who may struggle to afford the additional expenses associated with an extended undergraduate program.
Language Policy & Marginalisation of Regional Languages
The language controversy surrounding the National Education Policy (NEP) primarily revolves around the policy's emphasis on promoting Hindi and the potential marginalisation of regional languages. The NEP suggests a three-language formula, where Hindi and English are given prominence alongside the mother tongue or regional language. However, concerns have been raised that this formula disproportionately favours Hindi and English, potentially marginalising regional languages and communities that identify with them.
Concept from US not Adapted to India’s Needs
Many of the ideas and the framework of the NEP resemble educational practices or models implemented in the US. Instead of developing a policy tailored to India's unique needs and context, the NEP seemingly adopts ideas from a different educational system without proper adaptation. NEP's emphasis on standardised testing, vocational education, and multidisciplinary approaches, among other aspects, reflects a Western bias, particularly influenced by the US education system. Such an approach may not adequately consider the diverse educational requirements and cultural nuances of India. While the NEP draws inspiration from American educational models, it fails to sufficiently localise and contextualise these ideas within the Indian educational framework.
Privatisation and Commercialisation of Education
The National Education Policy has faced criticism for being perceived as contributing to the privatisation and commercialisation of education. NEP 2020 puts a significant emphasis on the involvement of the private sector in education. The policy encourages the establishment of private schools, colleges, and universities, including for-profit institutions, potentially leading to the exclusion of economically disadvantaged students who may not afford private education.
Also Read | The Harrowing Stories Of Indian Nursing Students
The promotion of private educational institutions can lead to increased fees and costs, making education less affordable for many students. The NEP 2020 does not adequately prioritise strengthening and investing in public educational institutions. Public schools and universities, which cater to a significant portion of the population, should receive more attention and resources to ensure equitable access to quality education but the policy focuses disproportionately on promoting private institutions at the expense of public education.
NEP Gives us Hope if Implemented Well
Lata Vaidyanathan, an educationist and Director of Gyan Bharati School, acknowledges that the National Education Policy (NEP) has brought about significant changes. The NEP aims to establish a standard framework that aligns with international standards, departing from the previous 10+2+3 system to the 5+3+3+4 structure.
According to Vaidyanathan, the most significant changes can be observed in the early childhood educational framework, highlighting the importance of focusing on early childhood education for holistic development. However, she acknowledges that any major changes in the education system can generate scepticism among people.
The National Education Policy in India has garnered mixed reactions and critical reviews from various quarters. While the policy aims to bring about transformative changes and improve the education system, it faces significant challenges and shortcomings that need to be addressed for its successful implementation.
One of the key areas of concern is the lack of a well-defined roadmap and implementation strategy for the proposed curriculum reforms. The sudden shift to a new framework without proper training and infrastructure can undermine the quality of education and hinder effective delivery of the intended outcomes. It is essential for the government to allocate adequate resources and invest in capacity building to ensure a smooth transition and effective execution of the curriculum reforms.
The NEP 2020 requires careful consideration, adjustments, and a collaborative approach to address the criticisms and concerns raised. By addressing these challenges and ensuring the active involvement of all stakeholders, including teachers, educators, parents, and policymakers, a robust and inclusive education system can be established in India. This will empower its citizens and prepare them for the demands of the future.