National Education Policy 2020

The National Education Policy of India 2020 (NEP 2020), which was started by the Union Cabinet of India on 29 July 2020, outlines the vision of new education system of India. The new policy replaces the previous National Policy on Education, 1986.
Shortly after the release of the policy, the government clarified that no one will be forced to study any particular language and that the medium of instruction will not be shifted from English to any regional language. The language policy in NEP is a broad guideline and advisory in nature; and it is up to the states, institutions, and schools to decide on the implementation. Education in India is a Concurrent List subject.
The policy has faced criticism from multiple scholars and educationists for its hasty implementation, with some calling it a threat to equitable education. Its implementation has also led to nationwide protests across India.
The NEP 2020 replaces the National Policy on Education of 1986. In January 2015, a committee under former Cabinet Secretary T. S. R. Subramanian started the consultation process for the New Education Policy. Based on the committee report, in June 2017, the draft NEP was submitted in 2019 by a panel led by former Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) chief Krishnaswamy Kasturirangan. The Draft New Education Policy (DNEP) 2019, was later released by Ministry of Human Resource Development, followed by a number of public consultations. The Draft NEP was 484 pages. The Ministry undertook a rigorous consultation process in formulating the draft policy: "Over two lakh suggestions from 2.5 lakh gram panchayats, 6,600 blocks, 6,000 Urban Local Bodies (ULBs), 676 districts were received."
The NEP 2020 enacts numerous changes in India's education policy. It aims to increase state expenditure on education from around 3% to 6% of the GDP as soon as possible.
The National Education Policy keeps the mother tongue as the medium of instruction till Grade 5 while recommending its continuance till Grade 8 and beyond. Sanskrit and foreign languages will also be given emphasis. The Policy recommends that all students will learn three languages in their school under the 'formula', of which at least two should be native to India. It also states that no language will be imposed on the students.
Shortly after the release of the policy, the government clarified that the language policy in NEP is a broad guideline; and that it was up to the states, institutions and schools to decide the implementation. A more detailed language strategy would be released in the National Curriculum Framework in 2021. Note was also made that there were already institutions which had implemented this language policy 60 years ago such as the Sardar Patel Vidyalaya. Both the Education Policy of 1986 and the Right to Education Act, 2009 promoted usage of the mother tongue too as an advisory guideline.
After a failed attempt to import international branch campuses in 2012, the NEP 2020 renewed the effort by explicitly allowing for foreign universities to establish campuses in India as well as giving permission for IITs to set up campuses overseas. The policy sets a grand goal of utilizing international education to reestablish India as a Vishwa Guru (or world teacher), which was reiterated by India's vice president, M. Venkaiah Naidu, who expressed a desire to establish India to attract global academic talent. Scholars have raised question about the idea of importing higher education institutions from other countries in order to advance a goal of positioning the country as a world teacher.
The NEP 2020 puts forward many policy changes regarding teachers and teacher education. To become a teacher, a 4-year Bachelor of Education will be the minimum requirement needed by 2030. The teacher recruitment process will also be strengthened and made transparent. The National Council for Teacher Education will frame a National Curriculum Framework for Teacher Education by 2021 and a National Professional Standards for Teachers by 2022.
Under NEP 2020, EdTech companies and startups are provided with necessary guidelines and impetus to develop learning management systems, ERP software, assessment platforms, online labs etc. for schools and universities. National Educational Technology Forum (NETF), an autonomous body is also created to facilitate exchange of ideas on technology usage to improve learning. In September 2021, in line with NEP, NITI Aayog partnered with Byju's to provide free access to its tech-driven learning programmes to engineering aspirants from 112 districts.
The NEP emphasises the importance of India's native knowledge traditions and inspiring 'Indianness' in people; in this vein, various Indian Knowledge Systems (IKS) initiatives have been undertaken to guide research and propagate understanding of indigenous knowledge.
Under NEP 2020, numerous new educational institutes, bodies and concepts have been given legislative permission to be formed. These include:
The policy proposes new language institutions such as the Indian Institute of Translation and Interpretation and the National Institute/ Institutes for Pali, Persian and Prakrit. Other bodies proposed include the National Mission for Mentoring, National Book Promotion Policy, National Mission on Foundational Literacy and Numeracy.
Krishnaswamy Kasturirangan, chairperson of the National Education Policy (NEP) drafting panel, commented "No language is being imposed. Multi-lingual flexibility is still the basis for the new NEP 2020". The UGC has asked that awareness about the policy should be spread among students and teachers. Prime Minister Narendra Modi stated that the policy focuses on 'how to think' rather than 'what to think'.
The IIT Kanpur Director, Abhay Karandikar, supported the new policy, while the IIT Delhi director, V. Ramgopal Rao, compared the new education policy with the Morrill Land-Grant Acts of the United States by calling it a "Morril Moment" for India. He emphasized that the policy promotes educational opportunities for all, aiding the country's development by removing barriers and increasing accessibility to education. Both the chancellor and the vice-chancellor of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) called the policy a "positive step forward", while Najma Akhtar, the vice-chancellor of Jamia Milia Islamia, called the policy "ground-breaking". Former Delhi University vice-chancellor Dinesh Singh, said "the policy lays down the road map pretty nicely". Venkaiah Naidu, the Vice President of India, welcomed the policy's flexibility and appreciated its "loftier" goal of bringing out-of-school children into the school system and reducing dropouts.
Lok Sabha MP and Congress leader Shashi Tharoor welcomed the decision but stated his concerns about the implementation of the new policy. A report by the Observer Research Foundation stated the same.
Dhiraj Kumar Nite from Ambedkar University Delhi stated that the removal of the MPhil course was not in harmony with the principles of the NEP. While multiple exit points are offered at the undergraduate level, those interested in a Ph.D. do not have a quick exit point, which the MPhil could have provided if it had been repurposed. The JNU Student's Union (JNUSU) and Delhi University Teacher's Association criticized the government for approving the policy amidst the COVID-19 pandemic in India, stating that they had opposed the policy since its draft stage. CPI(M) leader Sitaram Yechury alleged that suggestions made by academicians were not taken into account, while the politburo of the party condemned the commercialization encouraged by the policy. Kumkum Roy of the Centre for Historical Studies, JNU, stated that the subjects on the studies of Gender Studies, Media, Environment and Development, Culture, Dalit, Discrimination and Exclusion, and Media have not been mentioned for development. In the study of the Constitution, Fundamental Rights have been left out. President of the DMK, M. K. Stalin, stated that the policy was passed without a discussion in the Parliament and would undermine the Tamil language, due to its "compulsory" option of Sanskrit at every level of education. Aishe Ghosh of the JNUSU tweeted that internships under the policy might lead to legalizing child labour.
The Draft NEP of 2019 was criticized for multiple reasons. A social media campaign protested over the inclusion of Hindi in schools in the south Indian states. The Student's Federation of India stated that it threatened the federal character of the educational structure, commercialized education and undermined independent research activity. Madhu Prasad of Frontline pointed out how the draft's merit-based college admissions criteria did not take into account reservations and the caste-based discrimination and oppression faced by many in the country. DP Sharma appreciated the current initiative of end to end transformation of Indian education system but expressed his concerns about the implementation with care and honesty and, connected the self-reliant India mission with education transformation.
The multiple-exit option for undergraduate programs might lead institutions to view student exits as individual choices that could be ignored, without initiating a case management process to identify and address underlying socioeconomic issues. Some argue that this reform exposes the inadequacy of current supportive measures even more starkly. Some experts argue that internationalization may not benefit the entire country, potentially favoring only the wealthy. To enhance India's position in higher education, partnerships with international academic publishers should be considered. Establishing universities in these publishers' names, providing them with brand value, and offering a percentage of profits gained through the use of their educational solutions, such as textbooks, learning support websites, and assessment tools, could be more beneficial. These publishers can also provide competent program structures based on their extensive subject-specific resources, ensuring that citizens receive internationally recognized education.
Such partnerships could prevent teaching jobs from being outsourced to foreigners through internationalization, closely aligning with Manusmriti Chapter 2, Verse 20, while simultaneously improving the quality of domestic teaching staff due to the rich content and support provided by these publishers. Additionally, this approach might attract more international companies to India, drawn by the availability of high-quality talent at a comparatively lower cost. If all states adopt this model, the cost of education would be significantly lower compared to private university fees. Forming alliances with publishers like Wiley, Routledge, and Pearson, and offering them substantial benefits, could strategically improve the higher education landscape in India.
Moreover, there are concerns about expanding the responsibilities of the National Testing Agency. Conducting entrance examinations for university admissions has been increasingly viewed as unscientific and impractical in Western countries, where many institutions are phasing out such tests in the post COVID-19 era. These exams are found to be not reflective of a person's true abilities and act only as gatekeepers of higher education due to the significant time and money required to invest. Western universities consider previous academic performance, applied projects or research activities that demonstrate mastery of knowledge and skills, and extracurricular activities as better predictors of success in graduate school. Additionally, on the cusp of artificial general intelligence in the 21st century, categorizing individuals based on their brainpower is increasingly seen as an outdated and ineffective strategy. The credibility of exams like JEE Main and NEET, conducted by National Testing Agency, is further questioned due to frequent test cheating scandals, raising doubts about their effectiveness and viability as entrance tests. Some fear that teaching responsibilities may shift from academic professors to private ed-tech companies, rather than using these companies' resources to support professors and colleges in delivering education. Additionally, the move toward online modules, as opposed to traditional classroom learning, is seen as part of a national vision promoting a distributed learning model focused on mass training and skill development. In contrast, some express concerns that direct, socially structured, and traditional learning may increasingly become reserved for the privileged few with higher financial means, through specialized institutes and private universities, which are already becoming more exempt from affirmative action regulations.