New Education Policy 2020: Review

This captures a review of the NEP 2020 as it pertains to school education based on my reading of the first 30 pages that are relevant to schools and my last 13 years in school education in India. Overall, the policy is forward looking, right for the child and well-intentioned. As with any education policy, a lot depends on the spirit and speed with which it is taken up by states and the rigour and care with which it is implemented.

There are 8 sections in the policy as it pertains to School Education. I have given a short commentary on each point and where necessary, on sub-points.

1. Early Childhood Care and Education: The Foundation of Learning - Super.

Universal access to ECCE is long overdue. This will lead to standardised outcomes across the country which is a good thing. It sets the benchmark that all pre-school chains will now have to beat - shouldn’t be difficult because from my experience at Zee Learn, most preschool chains had pretty strong curriculums anchored on global best practices. It is the mom and pop preschools that will need to upgrade. Net positive for parents and children.

2. Foundational Literacy and Numeracy: An Urgent & Necessary Prerequisite to Learning - Ok.

The intention seems good. But going by the CCE experience, I fear that this should not be an excuse to go down to the lowest denominator of literacy and numeracy skills. We must benchmark to global best in terms of outcomes and then of course, contextualise the pedagogy and tools. 

3. Curtailing Dropout Rates and Ensuring Universal Access to Education at All Levels - Super.

Open and Distance Learning and National Institute of Open Schools have to be strengthened to reach the unreached and underserved. With Covid, we have seen the power of online learning. Making it easy for private players to set up schools by making the requirements less onerous is a welcome intention. It will be interesting to wait and watch if they actually translate into practice because the track record of government in deregulating has been poor in the past. 

4. Curriculum and Pedagogy in Schools: Learning Should be Holistic, Integrated, Inclusive, Enjoyable, and Engaging - Mixed. Individual ratings below for sub sections

• Restructuring school curriculum and pedagogy in a new design (5+3+3+4) - Super
• This is purely curricular and not pedagogical and not intended to make any change to physical infrastructure. Basically, it says what we all know that Classes 1 and 2 are different from Classes 3 to 5 even though historically, they have been clubbed as Primary. Some of us used to call the former set ‘Lower Primary’ and the latter set ‘Upper Primary’. Clubbing Classes 1 and 2 with Pre-primary as Foundational is indicating that the nature of learning should be experiential and concrete. And it should gradually progress from concrete to pictorial/symbolic to abstract as students move from Foundational to Preparatory to Middle to High. 
• Holistic development of learners - Super
• The intention to move from rote learning to real understanding is noble. If it is backed by reduction in amount of syllabus, it will work. We have been advocating this for years now. The idea of choice in secondary school is another one that we have been recommending.
• Multilingualism and the power of language - Mixed bag
• There is a clear emphasis on local languages, awareness of India’s multi-linguism. There is a directional tilt towards mother tongue learning but it is not mandatory. The Middle School project that aims to drive awareness of Languages of India is laudable. The push for Sanskrit etc seems politically driven but tough to see a big uptick unless Higher education or the job market changes. 
• Curricular integration of essential subjects and skills - Super
• Creation of a basic minimum outcomes is welcome because it will ensure that all students in India at least achieve that level. Inclusion of coding and computational skills means that a lot of companies who are currently relying on coding will suffer because it will become part of mainstream curriculum. Similar to what happened to NIIT when UGC introduced BCA and MCA. Introduction of contemporary subjects such as AI, Design Thinking, Organic Living is good.
• National textbooks with local content and flavour - Poor
• The anachronistic nature of this clause stands out. We still anchor learning outcomes on textbooks when multi-modal forms of learning and taking in information are so well entrenched in our life. The good thing is the choice for teacher in enshrined in the policy. Will prevent any regulatory overreach in mandating one textbook for everyone. Intention to provide textbook at a low cost is laudable but can open a door for price controls. 
• Transforming assessment for student development - Super
• The aim and purpose of assessment to move from testing rote learning to one that aids learning to help teachers revise their practice and help remediate is a great step. The reform in board exams are also timely and well intentioned. Offering different levels of subjects (Maths, English, Science etc) is good because it gives student choice. The introduction of Class 3, 5, 8 exams has the risk of increasing exam stress on children. The setting up of NACSE and NTA is welcome because it will standardise testing and reduce entrance exam pressure. This will have a negative impact on the multiple test prep companies because most tests are expected to collapse into 1 at the under grad level and another at the post grad level on the lines of SAT and GRE/GMAT.
• Support for gifted students / students with special talents - Super.

5. Teachers - Super

The reform of the B.Ed. program is in the right direction. Moving it out of mom and pop B.Ed shops into multi-disciplinary colleges and universities is also a great step to improve quality and giving flexibility in different course durations, while ensuring basic requirements are met is well thought through. Will improve the quality of teachers in the country. The importance given to Continuous Professional Development (CPD) is also laudable. But incentives for participating in CPD are missing. This has been a problem historically too where training are seen as year-end checklist items and not as a way to further one’s career.

6. Equitable and Inclusive Education: Learning for All - Super

Planning for Socially and Economically Disadvantaged Groups (SEDGs) is the right thing to do. But it needs to be followed with enough budgetary allocation because this will be mostly a philanthropic or govt. lead pursuit. Private unaided players will not be playing a large part in this endeavour, however socially and morally desirable this might be.

7. Efficient Resourcing and Effective Governance through School Complexes/Clusters - Super

Nearly 4 years back I had advocated the idea of pooling single room and single teacher schools into bigger clusters because research was increasingly showing that larger clusters that could afford teachers, resources etc weer better for learning. I had advocated investing in transport to take students to these schools and not in small buildings that go to these students. I’m glad that this is being implemented.

8. Standard-setting and Accreditation for School Education - Mixed Bag

While in intent it is positioned as separation of powers of the government between regulator, operator and policy-maker, there is sufficient mistrust in the system to anticipate this as creating more rent seeking structures. The erstwhile Department of Education is being split into 4 bodies - a) policymaking with Department of School Education, b) operations of public schools with Directorate of School Education, c) maintaining of minimum standards by State School Standards Authority (SSSA) and d) curriculum and academic matters with State Council of Education Research and Training (SCERT). SSSA is potentially problematic because it has the power to grant licenses to new schools to begin operations (License to Start School - LSS). Govt’s track record in being facilitative when given licensing powers has not been great, so this is a watch out.

Stopping commercialisation of education  - Potentially affects high fee charging schools adversely. The intent to review RTE to remove input based criteria is welcome because RTE is currently onerous for affordable schools. Regular assessment is good for the system because it generates data that can be used for course correction.