26-05-2025
People's Education Policy challenges NEP 2020, seeks rollback of key measures
Even as the implementation of many aspects of the National Education Policy 2020 is in full swing, the All India Save Education Committee has released a draft alternative to it. Termed, 'Draft People's Education Policy 2025: An Alternative to NEP 2025', it delivers a robust critique of NEP 2020 while proposing some alternatives.
The People's Education Policy (PEP) refers to several attempts to recast the education system in the past including when the Congress government under Rajiv Gandhi proposed a New Education Policy. It says the diagnosis of the ills plaguing the Indian education system is correct but the NEP 2020 will only exacerbate the situation.
The PEP notes falling percentage allocation in Central budget, slashing of UGC funds, restricting government funds to National Research Foundation and so on. It critiques the approach of PPP model, privatization, academia-industry collaboration and so on. 'Privatization, commercialization, and corporatization of education would hinder education's universalization,' it says.
The PEP critiques the World Bank's Strengthening Teaching-Learning and Results for States (STARS) project, launched in India in 2021, for promoting a market-driven framework and fostering direct partnerships between education institutions and industries. As a result, industry representatives will dictate curricula, syllabi, pedagogy, and evaluation methods, 'severely compromising the autonomy of universities and academic bodies,' it says.
The concept of Outcome-Based Education (OBE), now central to the NEP 2020 framework, may have some relevance in technical training or skill development, its wholesale application across all streams of knowledge is fundamentally flawed, says the draft policy.
The HEGC, which has replaced the University Grants Commission (UGC) in matters of funding, brings funding mechanisms under tighter central control. The Higher Education Commission of India (HECI), once fully operationalized, will further erode university autonomy by regulating academic standards, curriculum frameworks, and institutional accreditation through centralised bodies, it says.
NEP 2020 and its implementation frameworks promote the entry of foreign universities into India, ostensibly to raise standards of education. 'However, these foreign institutions will primarily cater to the rich elite, charging exorbitant fees and operating as profit-making enterprises,' it says.
The DPEP opposes four-year UG programme, splitting courses and awarding certificates, diplomas and so on, saying this will create hierarchies among students. It is against centralized admissions tests such as NEET, CUET and so on, and wants admission decisions to universities.
The DPEP demands that education should go back into the State list but federal funding should continue and increase. The credit framework, learning levels, and learning outcomes prescribed in NEP 2020 are all tools of centralism and attempt to enforce a national curriculum, according to it. It opposes the No-Detention Policy under the Right to Education Act, too, and prescribes annual examinations for each year.
It faults the NEP 2020 for not mandating fee committees to prevent profiteering and allowing commercialization. The draft policy critiques the promotion of Indian Knowledge Systems for attempting to rewrite history, attempting to inculcate a communal bias among students, and promoting unscientific, magical outlooks.
The promotion of online learning commodifies education, where each credit is essentially sold for a price, and formal learning is diminished. The proposal for digital universities further illustrates this shift towards a market-driven approach to education, where students will need to purchase access to the necessary products to earn credits while likely working at a young age.
Main proposals of the PEP
The PEP proposes universal, free education, not just a focus on literacy and numeracy, and seeks to end central schemes such as SSA, RMSA and so on. It rejects the RTE Act and says that instead of private schools being asked to take in poor students, the government must expand on school allocation and commit to teaching all of them. State governments must finance all education and be in-charge. Center should support.
The PEP wants to reinstate the 10+2+3 system. It wants formal, classroom education to take precedence, and, for that reason, wants to defocus on online courses. To achieve this, it wants to appoint permanent teaching positions, opposes vocationalisation of academic streams.
Early Childhood Care and Education is welcome but the NEP 2020 doesn't recommend a uniform system of schooling and allows multiple types, it charges. Many children will go to Anganwadi centers while some will go to government schools and a few to private. It also advises Anganwadi workeres should be delinked from Ministry of Women and Child Development and brought to Education Ministry.
Exchange programmes such as semester-abroad based on MoUs are acceptable if scholarships or are funded, but foreign universities should not set up branch campuses. Twinning, joint degree programmes not allowed.
No to integration of Ayush with modern medicine
The PEP says a national-level standard-setting body shall maintain uniform standards of medical education across the country. State-level academic bodies shall use these standards as guidelines. 'Considering India's socio-economic, cultural, and linguistic diversity, a single national-level entrance or exit examination is unsuitable. Universities must have the autonomy to decide on syllabi, curricula, and examination systems.'
