Hyderabad: The National Education Policy (2020) launched on July 29, is wide-ranging in its scale as it seeks to overhaul the country's education structure. It intends to thoroughly overhaul the primary and higher education, both the structural and pedagogical aspects.
- The NEP is premised on eight policy thrusts:
- Schooling and Elementary Schooling
- School Infrastructure and Resources
- Holistic Development of Students
- Inclusivity
- Assessments
- Curriculum and Pedagogical Framework
- Teacher Recruitments/Teacher Education
Role of Government Departments/Bodies/Institutions
Through a transformation of these core areas of education, the government seeks to achieve a substantial increase in spending on education and an increase in the Gross Enrolment Ratio to 50 per cent by 2035, introduce innovation and creativity in the education system with the ultimate goal to make “India a global knowledge superpower”.
Pedagogically this entails a profound shift in the curricula of both primary and higher education. At school level, the most significant provision is the promotion of mother tongue as a “medium of instruction until at least Class V...”
Liberal Arts Approach
Equally significant is the emphasis on the Liberal Arts Approach. It combines academic disciplines with vocational education. For primary education, the liberal arts approach seeks to promote vocational education. School education will consist of a foundational stage (age group 3 yrs to 8 yrs), preparatory stage (age group 8 yrs to 11 yrs), middle stage (age group 11 yrs to 14 yrs) and secondary stage (age group 14 to 18 yrs).
Read: 'Education Policy completely missed out how to deal with COVID like situation in future'
This thrust towards liberal arts approach and the concomitant vocational education is carried over in higher education where it is to be nurtured through a Choice-based Credit System (CBCS).
In higher education, the liberal arts programme combines academic disciplines with vocational education and does not insist on a student’s core competence in any discipline/subject of study.
Furthermore, the existing three-years under-graduate programme, in the Arts and Sciences, is extended to a four years programme. The student, however, has the option to exit after one year (certificate programme), two years (diploma programme) or three years (degree programme). Only those who wish a career in research are to opt for the fourth year. In order to promote student mobility, they have the option to save their credits and can rejoin the course after a period of time.
PM to helm Rashtriya Shiksha Aayog
The policy proposes a comprehensive restructuring of the institutions of higher education, beginning with the renaming of HRD ministry to Ministry of Education.
Read: Free and compulsory education positive devp of New Education Policy, says Yogendra Yadav
A centralised Rashtriya Shiksha Aayog (RSA), led by the Prime Minister, will be the apex body deciding on, monitoring and regulating, all levels and processes that relate to the generation, dissemination and movement of educational resources and skills. It will comprise Union ministers and senior bureaucrats. The RSA will, through its Executive Council, direct the missions to make budgetary allocations, review plans and monitor bodies that will separately fund, set standards, accredit and regulate Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs).
Universities
Uniform regulatory and outcomes parameters for both Private and Public HEIs will be developed. The policy proposes closure of affiliating-type universities, which are to be substituted by three types of institutions – Multidisciplinary Research Universities (Type 1), Multidisciplinary Teaching Universities (Type 2), and Autonomous Multidisciplinary Colleges (Type 3). A merit based criteria for recruitment and retention of the faculty is advocated.
The Bologna Convention
It would be naïve to believe that a reform of this magnitude could be implemented without start-up problems. It will be worthwhile, therefore, to summarize the birth pangs of an equally ambitious policy of education reform that forms the template of NEP 2020.
Read: NEP 2020: Comprehensive framework will boost education in country, says expert
In Europe, the Bologna Convention was launched in 1998-1999. The process established goals for reform in the participating countries, such as the three-cycle degree structure (bachelor, master’s, doctorate), and adopted shared instruments, such as the European Credits Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) and the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG).
It also covers quality assurance, so that students, graduates, universities and all other stakeholders can be confident in the quality of different systems and the work of different providers.
The Bologna Template
The similarities between The Bologna Convention and NEP 2020 is evident both at the level of measures and objectives. It will be well worth remembering that the implementation of The Bologna Convention witnessed a significant backlash in Europe both from the students and from the German-speaking nations.
All over Europe, student representatives voiced some criticism about Bologna. For example, the European Student Union (ESU) criticized that they were only marginally included in the decision-making process. ESU was concerned that in many countries the level of attention given to employability is not yet sufficient.
In contrast, German and Austrian student representatives reject the Bologna process in principle. They were in particular opposed to the very concept of employability which in their view subordinates universities to the demands of the labour market.
The protest was particularly strong in some German-speaking countries. The opposition against Bologna was mainly driven by an insistence on Humboldtian traditions.
Read: NEP to bring new opportunities for students: Jamia V-C
Bologna and governance reforms are interpreted as a violation of academic values from the perspective of the Humboldtian tradition. Both reforms are regarded as utilitarian approaches that threaten the cultural profile and identity of the Germanic tradition. The controversy over Bologna was not the first ‘clash of values’ of this kind. In 2009, Austria and Germany experienced strong student protests over several weeks.
The Bologna process was a key target of criticism (‘Bologna burns’). The mood of this opposition was aptly symbolized by a slogan at student protest rallies, claiming: “In former times, I was a poet and a philosopher; now I am a Bachelor”. Another popular slogan juxtaposed the spiritual sphere of cultivation with the vulgar sphere of commerce; the Bachelor, of course, is associated with the vulgar: “Rather a poet and a philosopher than a banker and a Bachelor”.
Many academics in Germany and Austria – at least those who actively participate in the debate about Bologna – join the criticism of students. According to Wolfgang Frühwald, the former president of German Research Council: “Mental resistance to this reform is huge. I hardly know anyone – to be honest, no one – who is inspired by the change to Bachelor and Master courses. (…) The reforms are pushed by university managers, higher education organizations, and policymakers. The gap between those who design the reform and academics at the bottom is huge”.
Read: New Education Policy adopts cafeteria approach, says panel member Dr. MK Sridhar
Opponents claim that Bologna has resulted in a substantial deterioration of study conditions. They argue that many outcomes of the reform are the exact opposite of its original goals. This criticism refers to the workload for students, to academic mobility of students, and to employability of Bachelors. Instead of making the workload for students more transparent, the Bologna process has increased the workload and thus intensified the ‘time burden’ on students. Instead of facilitating mobility of students, the new study architecture has resulted in a decrease of student mobility. Instead of improving the employability of graduates, Bologna has created a new degree that is not accepted in the labour market.
Challenges before NEP
Will the NEP 2020 circumvent these pitfalls is the moot question? It is here that some of the silences and the contradictions in the policy become pertinent.
The first significant hurdle before the objective of the policy and the reality of the present conjuncture surfaces on the question of an increase in the Gross Enrolment Ratio to 50 per cent by 2035. Such a quantum leap in gross enrolment ratio would require a commensurate increase in the infrastructure of primary education, where will the funding come from? The policy is rather tentative on this, it hopes for private and philanthropic contributions, however, history suggests that such contribution in the rural primary education have been rare.
Expansion through Online Distance Learning (ODL) and Massive Online Courses (MOOCs) “must play a significant role in increasing GER to 50 per cent,” as per the policy document. However, the recent example of online teaching during the Covid19 lockdown suggests that it militates against the poorer classes who cannot afford the electronic devices necessary to access the on line courses.
Read: Discard hypocrisy! Open up education to meet the post COVID world
The policy also has an inbuilt tendency to favour current market-oriented courses, which may militate against the already weak research and development potential of higher education.
Introduction of a four year under-graduate programme will impose a year worth of cost to education, which may prove debilitating for middle class families. We may witness many meritorious students from middle and lower middle classes drop out at the various mandated exit points under economic compulsion than choose a career in research and higher academics. This tendency is also promoted by the fact that the NEP advocates educational loans to meet the fee structure.
The policy advocates to synergise the research potential in HEIs with the R&D requirements of industry and commercial businesses. In this way, advanced research in theory both in science and social science will be squeezed out.
It will be worthwhile that discussions on these issues are not kept on the backburner to wrap up the implementation of the policy.
(Kumar Sanjay Singh teaches History at Swami Shraddhanand College, University of Delhi)
