SEP must turn access into genuine inclusion

The focus on making quality education affordable is welcome. But this should be accompanied by a transformation in the curriculum

A few days ago, the Karnataka government, keeping its poll promise of implementing the State Education Policy (SEP) as an alternative to the National Education Policy (NEP), came out with a 2,197-page report. The main highlight of this was free education for girl students up to graduation as well as extending reservations to private institutions.

The main aim of the National Education Policy-2020 in the higher education sector is to increase the Gross Enrollment Ratio from the present 27% to 50% by 2035. It also aims at cutting down institutions from the present 58,000 to 12,000.

Only 12% of graduates proceed to post-graduate studies, and from there just 1% proceed towards pursuing research. NEP stresses multidisciplinary approach to learning, but at the higher education level, specialisation in a particular subject domain is the need preparing students to pursue research at a later stage.

The NEP welcomes initiatives such as allowing 100 foreign universities to operate from Indian soil. The mushrooming of private Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) is mostly for commercial purposes. How many can afford this expensive education model? We as educators need to question the purpose of many of these institutions and need to seek accountability from each one of them towards nation building and social commitment.

The SEP is clear that foreign universities can help local institutions by hand-holding them in technology transfer, joint research, student and teacher exchanges, leading to improvement in the quality of education as well as making higher education affordable.

The SEP’s focus is on improving quality and making education affordable as well as promoting social justice, keeping girl child, Muslims, OBCs, SC/STs in mind, in continuation with the socialistic policies of our Constitution.

The SEP is silent on how higher education institutions would fare in the NAAC and NIRF assessments, as one of the important questions raised by the assessors is how the NEP is being implemented and, more importantly, whether the institutions have adopted the Outcome Based Education (OBE) model, Indian Knowledge System (IKS) and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR).

Apart from losing out on funds and grants and grants from UGC and other funding agencies for non-implementation of NEP, the institutions following SEP would lose out on NAAC and NIRF rankings as well.

The present assessment and ranking systems in India assess institutions from urban centers to rural areas and remote areas as well as private and government institutions on the same parameters. Most top ranking HEIs enroll students with a very high cut-off percentage. What is the point of educating a brilliant student and maintain their intellectual upward trend? Both the NEP and SEP are silent on this issue.

HEIs should prioritise educating first-generation learners, girl students, single parent students, kids coming from socio-economically backward sections of the society, kids of unskilled migrant labourers, Dalits and Adivasis who need a helping hand for upward mobility.

It is the responsibility of HEIs to produce socially responsible students who become global citizens aware of their and others’ human rights, constitutional obligations and a concern for our common home – mother Earth.

As lack of infrastructure plagues HEIs in rural areas, government and policy makers would do well to concentrate on bridging the infrastructural gaps between the urban-rural divide among these HEIs by investing and seeking corporate funding.

The emphasis of NEP on AI, multi-disciplinary learning, machine learning, skill enhancement sounds very good and welcoming, but the basic question again is to find out if we are equipped to teach these courses in rural areas where 43% of our universities and 61.4% of colleges are located.

The SEP has come out with a two-language policy, which is welcome. Today, the world needs young minds with holistic education where students are taught to have a balance between academics, social, emotional, physical and cognitive development irrespective of their class, caste, colour, creed or gender.

The focus should be on skill development, including life skills, social
skills and soft skills, making them competent and futuristic as compassionate individuals.

True inclusivity in higher education cannot be realised through policy rhetoric alone; it demands an overhaul
of institutional ethos, infrastructure and pedagogy.

While the SEP proposes corrective measures for structural inequities, its success rests on whether it can foster ecosystems that genuinely support the marginalised—not just in access, but in academic success, retention and upward mobility.

As Paulo Freire emphasised in Pedagogy of the Oppressed, education must be “the practice of freedom”, enabling learners to perceive social, political and economic contradictions and to take action against oppressive elements.

The challenge, therefore, is not merely to widen the gates of higher education but to reform what lies within. Inclusion must be accompanied by curricular transformation.

The Indian Knowledge System (IKS), for example, cannot be relegated to a symbolic component but must be organically woven into pedagogy to restore epistemic balance long lost to colonial frameworks. Likewise, the two-language policy has the potential to empower learners from vernacular backgrounds, provided the policy is implemented with adequate teacher training and resource development.

Digital learning, a cornerstone of NEP, raises further questions. Without addressing the digital divide, particularly in rural and remote HEIs, the vision of a hybrid or online-driven model may deepen educational inequity.

The component of practical education cannot be supplemented by online theory-based teaching. A holistic approach requires synchronising technological advancement with infrastructural and pedagogical readiness. Investment must be directed not only toward digital tools but also toward localised teacher capacity, linguistic accessibility and context-relevant content.

Inclusivity must be seen not as an addendum but as the very framework upon which quality higher education rests. As articulated in the Constitution’s Preamble, justice—social, economic, and political—remains the cornerstone of the Republic. Higher education as a public good must reflect and reinforce this constitutional mandate in spirit and in practice.

(Victor is vice chancellor and Paul is professor and dean of Humanities and Social Sciences, St  Joseph’s University)