The new National Education Policy (NEP) adopted by the Union Cabinet on Wednesday would bring in a host of reforms, ranging from curriculum reduction to the abolition of MPhil.
The NEP seeks to establish an education system that directly contributes to the transformation of the country by delivering high-quality education to all and converting India into a worldwide knowledge giant. The NEP was developed by a committee led by former Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) chairman Kasturirangan and submitted to Union Human Resource Development Minister Ramesh Pokhriyal when he took office last year. The current NEP supersedes the one created in 1986.
Here are the top ten things you should know about the new NEP:
1) Board exams may be given in a modular format. To avoid rote learning, board exams would be based on knowledge and application.
2) MPhil courses will be phased out.
3) All higher education institutions, except law and medical schools, will be regulated by a single regulator.
4) Under the new Education Policy of the Central Government, common standards will be established for private and public higher education institutions.”We now have different requirements for designated universities, central universities, and independent freestanding institutions. According to the new Education Policy, for quality, all laws would be the same and would not be dependent on ownership “Amit Khare, Secretary of State for Higher Education, said.
5) According to the Centre’s new Education Policy, common entrance tests will be administered for admission to universities and higher education institutes.
6) Under the new National Education Policy, the school curriculum will be simplified to basic ideas, and vocational education will be integrated beginning in grade six.
7) The new strategy aims to increase access to higher education for half of all high school students by 2035 and to achieve universal adult literacy before then.
8) The Cabinet has approved a proposal to raise public expenditure on education to roughly 6% of GDP, up from approximately 4% presently, according to a top government official, while simultaneously restricting fees paid by educational institutions.
9) The government intends to achieve a 100 percent gross enrolment ratio from preschool through secondary education by 2030.
10) Mother tongue will be used as a medium of instruction until the fifth grade, and report cards will include a complete report on skills and capacities rather than merely marks and assertions.
A comparison of the NEP 2020 education strategy with that of 1986:
The Ministry of Human Resource Development (now the Ministry of Education) has replaced the 34-year-old National Policy on Education (NPE) of 1986 with the 2020 Education Policy. (NEP 2020).
The NEP 2020, which has been authorized by the union government, will seek to implement significant educational changes. The policy seeks to achieve universal education from preschool through the secondary level by 2030, with a 100 percent gross enrolment ratio (GER) in school education.
India has had three education policies since independence. The first policy was established in 1968, with a focus on compulsory education for children up to the age of 14. In 1986, the second NPE was launched. The second NPE placed a strong focus on bridging the gap between diverse social groupings. While the 1986 policy focused on attaining educational homogeneity across socioeconomic classes, it did not account for the competitive global landscape, which became crucial with the start of the Indian economy’s globalization following the 1991 reforms.
At a strategic level, the contrasts in both strategies revolve largely around three fundamental dimensions: societal vision, social purpose, and educational purpose. Both education strategies were created with the social structure in mind. In some ways, the policies of 1986 and 2020 reflect a strikingly contrasting vision of Indian society. In the 1980s, the world economy was primarily local, and some were in transition.
In comparison, today’s international economies operate as sophisticated global entities. In light of this, the 1986 NPE emphasized uniformity and fair opportunity for all.
- As most organizations have achieved maturity and critical inertia by 2020, NEP 2020 focuses on improving individual capacity and attaining excellence through customized training choices while aiming to decrease regulation by allowing institutional greater internal autonomy.
- This is clear from the reduction in the number of educational regulators to one, as well as the fact that the new NEP 2020 will allow topic selection, software training in schools, credit transfer, multiple entrants, and an exit system.
- The second distinction is in terms of societal purpose. The NEP 1986 was designed to provide standard educational opportunities to diverse socioeconomic groups; hence, its major goal was to include underprivileged people. While the NEP 2020 maintains a focus on social inclusion, it also intends to establish special education zones in regions with a high number of disadvantaged populations. Furthermore, NEP 2020 focuses on the economic value of educational learning and training.
- Third, the distinction is in their view of the goals of education. The previous approach placed a greater emphasis on comprehending the world and human existence. According to NPE 1986, the goal of education is threefold: general human resource development, international cooperation, and peaceful coexistence, and the advancement of socialism, secularism, and democracy.
- The current strategy prioritized national development through equipping residents with information, skills, and opportunities for personal growth.
Overall, the NPE 1986 produced a pool of educated and trained people resources who contributed to the value chain, whereas the NEP 2020 envisions producing human resources who would generate value propositions.
The adoption of the new NEP 2020 will bring the Indian education system closer to international norms. In an online survey of 1103 students from throughout India, approximately 96.4 percent were positive about the outcomes of the new policy’s implementation.