Author – Harishchandra Sukhdeve

Modi government think tank had presented the draft National Education Policy 2019 (DraftNEP2019} in June 2019 after four years of ‘out-of-the-box’ thinking. It was open for public comments initially for 30 days, later extended till 14 August, 2019. The Dr Kasturirangan Committee draft was so confusing, so distorted and repetitive that it got whopping 2 lakh objections within a short period of 75 days. Thank god, draft was not made available in all the languages. It was available only in Hindi and English, with just a cursory summary in other languages.

In my review of the draft policy, I had called it Ingenious Trickery. It was published in Velivada. Our co-ordination committee in Maharashtra has raised concerns on ten major points in a letter sent to the HRD minister with a copy to all the Members of Parliament. The draft policy document boasted of ‘out-of-the-box’ thinking for far reaching ‘Revamp’ in the present education system. On connecting the dots of proposed revamp, we observed that it would lead to –

1. More Autonomy for complete Privatization & Profiteering,
2. Complete Autonomy for Discrimination in Teaching and in offering Curriculum Courses,
3. Govt.’s handing over Education sector to Private Philanthropists,
4. Creation of Dubious & Diversionary Models like School Complexes and SEZs,
5. Creation of Confusing Parallel Functionaries through Social Workers, Counsellors,
6. Offering of Trivial & Deceptive Modular Secondary Education,
7. Abolishing Reservations,
8. Abolishing Scholarships,
9. Creation of “Ghettos” of URGs, and
10. Relegation of Women to the status of Secondary Citizens.

We had elaborated in detail on the above points with quotes from the draft policy in our letter to the HRD minister. We concluded then that the above mentioned ten issues, and many other, are critical for any forward-looking nation with the best ever demographic dividend in the world. It is important that we focus our education policy to harness it to the best possible capacity to create world class scientists and humanists to defend our nation and democracy. The draft NEP2019 absolutely fails in these objectives because of lack of vision and partisan approach to educating our own people. It is ‘We’ and ‘They’ approach rather than ‘We the People of India’. Therefore, the draft NEP2019 is against the principles of the Constitution of India and deserves to be rejected outright.

It violates the Articles 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India by not identifying and not making recommendations for the Socially and Educationally backward classes. In fact, while defining URGs it relies on socio-economic backwardness. Ironically, the draft policy on Education has no comments neither any data on prevalent educational backwardness in the country. It violates the Fundamental Right to Education of all children as envisioned in the Constitution of India and is ignorant about the role of the government to provide free, compulsory and equal education to all. Instead, it further promotes drastic stratification of education for elite, the middle class and URGs. Why URGs should be restricted to SEZ and graduation in liberal arts which is not suitable for higher education.

It violates the Fundamental Rights of Equality by creating stratification in the models of education, not only for HEIs but even at school level, thereby strengthening inequality and discrimination in education, employment opportunities and self-emancipation.

It has failed to offer detailed study and analysis of what is wrong with the present system in various sectors thereby negating the Constitutional spirit of scientific temper and reasoning in policy formulation for the nation.

It is confused about financial outlay for such a drastic revamp of education system which it suggests. While it supports the State spending to the extent of 6% of GDP as recommended in earlier policies but at the same time strongly favours for linking it to the present levels of about 10% of the government spending and introduces uncharted funding from the philanthropists which is nothing but disguised private funding with complete autonomy for privatization and profiteering.

The draft policy fails on fathoming the complex issue of languages in a diverse nation of ours and proposes to offer obsolete and irrelevant Sanskrit at all levels. It will be thrust on students and parents who has no say in such matters. This violates their freedom of choice denying opportunities for potentially beneficial languages and disciplines for higher education. Therefore, the draft policy should be rejected outright for the above reasons. We demand that a new Education Commission shall be appointed to frame a comprehensive policy commensurate with Constitutional objectives of Inclusion and Diversity to cater to the needs of diverse communities for prosperity of all people of India.

Thankfully, the Final NEP2019 as presented by the Ministry of Human Resources Development of Govt of India has toned down many of the proposals of the draftNEP2019. The concerns about Reservations and Scholarships are addressed partially. The draft NEP2019 was spiteful and sort of full of hatred for the affirmative actions like reservations and scholarships. In a whole draft of about 500 pages, word Reservation had appeared only once, that too in denial!

The final NEP2019 provides for reservations as per Constitutional provisions in recruitment of faculty even in autonomous HEIs – “13.6. In keeping with the vision of autonomous institutions empowered to drive excellence, HEIs will have clearly defined, independent, and transparent processes and criteria for faculty recruitment, while following the reservations provided under the provisions of Constitution of India.”

But it is completely silent on Reservations for students from Socially and Educationally backward classes as provided in Art. 15 of the Constitution. It is silent also about reservations for its newly coined constituency, URGs [Under Represented Groups].

The trickery continues unashamedly in the Final draft of NEP2019 too. It begins with contempt for all previous education policies and initiatives. For example, it begins with “1.1. The previous policies on education have justifiably been preoccupied largely with issues of access and equity, but as a result have unfortunately dropped the baton with regard to quality of education.” If quality has been compromised so far, where is the evidence? Without quality education, how come Indian students proved their worth globally?

In fact, creation of dubious & diversionary Models like School Complexes and SEZs, offering of trivial & deceptive Modular Secondary Education and autonomy to the teachers in the name of preserving our ancient culture, introducing ambiguous class like URGs, teaching of liberal arts as curriculum subjects will seriously hamper the quality of education. It will only strengthen the Education_Divide which is glaring as acknowledged in the policy.

Thankfully, final policy seems to have discarded the semester system for High School (Secondary) stage. But it sticks with merging of co-curricular, extra-curricular subjects with the curricular ones. “4.7 … There will be no hard separation among ‘curricular’, ‘extracurricular’, or ‘co-curricular’ areas, among ‘arts’, ‘humanities’, and ‘sciences’, or between ‘vocational’ or ‘academic’ streams. Subjects such as physical education, the arts, and vocational crafts, in addition to science, humanities, and mathematics, will be seriously incorporated throughout the school curriculum, with a consideration for what is interesting and safe at each age.” [emphasis added]

However, all the major concerns as enumerated above in ten points remain in the Final policy document also. The Final policy declares its intent at 0.6 of Introduction as under –

“This National Education Policy aims to cater to the many growing developmental imperatives of this country on the one hand, while creating a just and equitable society on the other. This Policy has proposed the revision and revamping of all aspects of the education structure, including its regulation and governance, to create a new system that is aligned with the aspirational goals of 21st century education, while remaining consistent with India’s traditions and value systems.”

The policy desires to create an education system consistent with India’s traditions and value systems. It gives the example of two great ancient Universities at Nalanda and Takshashila. The policy also rightly claims that “The Indian education system produced scholars like Charaka and Susruta, Aryabhata, Bhaskaracharya, Madhava, Chanakya, Patanjali, and Panini, among numerous others.”

The problem arises because of two very distinct traditions and value systems both of which can be attributed to India. One is liberal and secular Buddhist value system which is reflected in the Constitution of India. The Buddhist traditions also had the world renowned ancient formal education institutions at Nalanda, Takshashila and Vikramshila. Another, is a system of Hindu beliefs which is based on inequality by birth and which believes in personalized education. The present dispensation at the helm of the country and their ideological mentors are clearly inclined towards Hindu traditions and value system.

As a result, while the policy aspires to build educational institutions of eminence on the lines of Nalanda and Takshashila of ancient years and Ivy League Universities/MIT/Stanford of the modern day, the undertones of the policy are oriented towards Hindu value systems. That is why there is focus on traditional liberal arts like carpentry, pottery making, and such caste-based vocations, separate models like SEZ for backward classes with their own community teachers, and undue stress on teaching the dead language Sanskrit. 

The final NEP2019 does not address to the aspirations of millions of Indians, almost 90% of the population of India. The 55 pages note by the MHRD is nothing but a refined, no frills essence of the draft policy. The policy will encourage severe stratification at all levels with privatization.

The final policy completely does away with hitherto avowed investment target of 6% of GDP. Now, it proposes to link it with govt expenditure to be increased from present 10% to 20% over a period of 10 years on the premise that present 10% govt expenditure is 3% of GDP. Govt wants to trick us into believing that 20% of govt expenditure in 10 years will automatically become 6% of GDP! That of course is not going to happen. If the govt believes in what policy says as “there is no better investment towards a society’s future than the high-quality education of our young people” then it should unequivocally stick to universal 6% of GDP expenditure on education and achieve that goal within five years. Govt should seriously make some enduring quality investment on education to achieve the vision of the policy.

The policy needs to be opposed by all the people of India because it is going to be extremely costly, especially higher education, for the common folk. The full autonomy about curriculum, fee structure, recruitment and governance to the Higher Education Institutions will take higher education beyond the reach of people of all castes and classes. The policy is completely anti-people.