New Education Policy 2020: The way of the future

Writing in 1961, in his celebrated preface to Frantz Fanon’s ‘The Wretched of the Earth’, Jean Paul Sartre described the colonial process and I quote “Not so very long ago, … the European élite undertook to manufacture a native élite. They picked out promising adolescents; they branded them, as with a red-hot iron, with the principles of western culture, they stuffed their mouths full with high-sounding phrases, grand glutinous words that stuck to the teeth. After a short stay in the mother country they were sent home, whitewashed”. This was as true of British colonial legacy in India; and in more ways than one, remains the dark cloud that hangs over an otherwise bright future of the young nation that we are. For a country like India, with over half the population under the age of 25 years, education – the manner in which knowledge is produced, shared, and responds to social and economic inequality – is central to a self-assured future and for expanding its intellectual and economic horizons.

As inheritors of the British colonial legacy, for far too long, we have been Macaulay’s children. The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 provides both the vision and the broad institutional framework to decolonise education in India. The NEP must be commended for charting a pathway to foster the spirit of intellectual freedom in India’s youth; and advancing a paradigm that will finally enable Indian education to find itself and India’s children to speak in their own voice. The NEP is not merely an interpreter of the maladies that afflict India’s education. First, it serves to constitute, step by step, the dialectic that education is, at its heart, all about knowledge construction, especially in young minds; and second, the conviction that this needs to be both understood and corrected if the people of our country, together with those in government, care enough to do what is necessary.

Four features of the NEP stand out because they address the deep-rooted problems that afflict school education.

First, the universalization of Early Childhood Care Education (ECCE) and the extension of the Right to Education (RTE) Act to cover all children from ages 3-18, thus aligning with Sustainable Development Goal 4 – “Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote life-long learning for all.” There can be little doubt that ECCE constitutes the weakest link in India’s school education and works to the great disadvantage of children in rural India. Poor ECCE adversely impacts learning outcomes over the long-term. Integrating the anganwadis into the elementary school system is an important innovation that NEP brings to ensure the seamless transition of children to formal schooling.

Second, the focus on developing foundational literacy and numeracy by Class 5, since this constitutes a key problem area for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. The NEP points out that “Numerous studies show that in the current educational system, once students fall behind, they tend to maintain flat learning curves for years, perpetually, unable to catch up.” This will be supported by the 5+3+3+4 curriculum and pedagogical structure. Combined with the emphasis that the NEP lays on mathematical thinking and developing the scientific temper, the paradigm shift is complete in preparing a child to face the challenges of the 21st century.

Third, the NEP removes the rigid separation between the Arts and the Sciences, between Curricular and extra-Curricular learning, and between Vocational and Academic streams.

Fourth, the NEP reiterates the most important principle of learning: that a child learns best in her own language. So, the NEP proposes that the medium of instruction till Class 5 should be in the mother tongue, the home language, or the regional language. The objective is to enable “development of multilingual skills in children”. For too long, speaking English well has been mistaken for intelligence; and far too many of our children, at least in urban India, know no other language but English. So finally, this important step should help exorcise Macaulay’s ghost.

There are several other important changes that are commendable, such as the ‘low-stake’ board exams to shift the emphasis to concepts, analysis, and knowledge application; the Gender Inclusion Fund, a much-needed instrument to advance gender equity.

I would point to just one fatal flaw in the NEP, and that is on the question of equity in the higher education sector. Ironically, it is when the NEP dwells on higher education that it begins to weaken both in its vision and in its resolve. It fails to address the condition of and the crisis in knowledge, as much as it fails to address the political economy of the extant higher education system. In the last two decades, governments at the Centre and in the states have actively promoted higher education as an industry to be developed by private investors. Less known is the fact that many, if not all, of these private colleges and universities, or education shops, if you will, are owned by politicians. Indeed, there would be few politicians worth their name who do not own engineering, medical or other degree colleges. Consider this: we had fewer than 150 universities at the turn of the century; by 2010, the country had over a thousand. Many of these universities are characterised by mediocrity and greed, both anathema to all that the NEP seeks to achieve.

It is not coincidence that, in parallel with the proliferation of these ‘education for profit’ peddlers, there has been a steady and accelerated withdrawal of the state from higher education. Both the UPA and the NDA governments have followed the same policy – that higher education cannot be advanced without private enterprise. This becomes a specious argument when the private enterprise resides amongst the party bigwigs; and the universities and colleges of higher learning are predatory pricing pools. Clearly, there is need for a transparent and objective framework that eliminates conflict of interest in higher education. Government cannot be policymaker, licensor and regulator rolled into one. This is one aspect on which the NEP fails.

The NEP must be welcomed, for it will transform school education. We will have to wait longer to gain the pre-eminence necessary in higher education.

(The writer is Director, Public Affairs Centre)