IAS Gyan

Daily News Analysis

A policy with many a right intention

3rd August, 2020 Editorial


  • Thirty-four years after the last National Policy on Education was introduced, in 1986, the National Education Policy, 2020 was announced.
  • A majority of the path-breaking proposals submitted by the Dr. K. Kasturirangan Committee, in the 2019 draft National Education Policy, seem to have been approved.
  • There are a couple of major new proposals in the 2020 policy, which were not proposed in the draft or which have been marginally modified from the draft policy.



  • The major recommendations of the Committee that have been approved include a 5+3+3+4 system in school education that incorporates early childhood care and education; universal education that includes the secondary level; adoption of school complexes; breakfast in the school meal programme; and introduction of vocational education at the upper primary level.
  • A series of reforms have been proposed in higher education too. These include a multidisciplinary system offering choices to students from among a variety of subjects from different disciplines; integrated (undergraduate, postgraduate and research levels) education; a four-year undergraduate programme; and overhauling of the governance structure in higher education.
  • There will be just one regulatory body for the entire sector in the Higher Education Commission of India.
  • The policy also places emphasis on the liberal arts, humanities, and Indian heritage and languages; facilitates selective entry of high-quality foreign universities; aims to increase public investment in education to 6% of the GDP; promises to provide higher education free to about 50% of the students (with scholarships and fee waivers); and aims to increase the gross enrolment ratio in higher education to 50% by 2035.
  • Some of these proposals were suggested by earlier committees such as the Yashpal Committee and C.N.R. Rao Committee, and several experts. As they have immense scope in revitalising the system, we may applaud many of these moves.
  • It also says the three-language formula will be implemented. The three-language formula will promote national integration.


Education as Public Good:

  • The recognition of education as a public good has important implications for public policy in planning, providing and financing education.
  • It also has important implications for the state’s approach towards private education.
  • Benevolent private players and private philanthropists draw inspiration from the nature of education as a public good.
  • It is public education that contributes to the building of nations, their growth — socially, economically, politically, culturally, and technologically — and the building of a humane society. There are many more statements in the policy that may be welcomed.
  • For instance, the policy promotes a holistic education as well as “each student’s holistic development in both academic and non-academic spheres”, emphasises extra-curricular activities, emphasises research, and speaks of “substantial investment in a strong, vibrant public education system”, and so on.


Missing in the final policy

  • One important statement that was repeatedly made in the draft policy, that all commercially oriented private institutions would be closed, is missing in the final policy.
  • The matter of commercialization of education has been dealt with by the Policy through regulatory approach that mandates full public self-disclosure of finances, though almost every policymaker and administrator in education recognizes that there is a serious problem with the private education sector in India.
  • The draft policy promised doubling public expenditure on education to 20% of the total government expenditure, from 10%. The 2020 policy simply reaffirms the commitment to allocation of 6% of GDP.
  • Missing areas include setting up of a National Education Commission at the national level and a similar one at the State level. There is no mention of State School Education Regulatory Authorities in the 2020 policy.
  • At the State level, the Department of School Education is regarded as the apex body. There is also no promise of ‘full’ recruitment of teachers at all levels, though the policy promises robust recruitment mechanisms to be put in place.


Way Forward:

  • The policy seems to have great faith in “light but tight” regulation, confidence in the private sector in making honest self-disclosures of all aspects of their operations, and faith in the adequacy of common norms for public and private institutions.
  • It also seems to have faith in the government’s ability to implement many reforms — for example, in doing away with the affiliating system and making all colleges’ autonomous degree-awarding colleges of high quality, ensuring institutional and faculty autonomy, and in the autonomous functioning of institutions of governance with no external interference. Policymakers and administrators have been struggling unsuccessfully with some of these issues for years.
  • A major challenge policymakers will continue to face is how to differentiate the benevolent philanthropic private sector from undesirable but powerful market forces in the education sector and regulate the entry and growth of the latter.