We are close to completing the second-year post announcement of the New Education Policy (NEP) 2020. The University Grants Commission has introduced some initiatives and regulatory guidelines to start operationalizing the policy framework in higher education. Another profession/subject-area specific agencies like the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and the National Council for Teachers Education (NCTE) too have shown a proactive approach to the policy implementation. However, despite the initial enthusiasm, our education system is to pass through a long transformational journey. Let’s investigate the main challenges that may affect the implementation of NEP 2020 in higher education institutions.
Most of our universities and institutions are making serious efforts to take a place in national level institutional rankings and ratings, conducted by the Government or its designated agencies.
The NEP also suggests developing ‘world-class institutions, but what denes ‘world class’ requires contextual analysis and interpretations before we start making efforts in that direction. Some enthusiastic rst movers have started working on the strategy without understanding its relevance and use in the Indian context. Most of the global, as well as domestic rankings, place high weightage on the ‘research output and publications of the institutions.
Sometimes, following the ‘indicator-based’ approach to preparation may lead to directionless growth. The institutions may manage to increase their publication numbers but unless the research is not part of the ‘academic culture’, such publications would not contribute to improving the quality and relevance of the education. Therefore, instead of chasing the indicators of world-class, the institutions must invest in developing systems, processes, and capacity building, which will be a more sustainable way to evolve as a world-class institution.
Curriculum reforms are another important area. For example; even before the NEP 2020, the UGC introduced two important measures: the Choice Based Credit System (CBCS) in 2016; and Learning Outcome Based Curriculum Framework (LOCF) in 2018. With the introduction of Academic Bank of Credit (ABC) Regulations 2021 and its Amendment in 2022, both the CBCS and LOCF can be implemented in their true spirit of offering curriculum flexibility and curriculum objectivity respectively. However, at the same time, the universities and institutions need supporting plans and policies to change the ‘Fixed Semester-Courses Timetable’ to ‘Flexible Course-Focused Timetable.’ The task is not much challenging but requires a complete shift in the way we plan the course delivery, timetable, assessment, and even the fee calculation. Unless there are clear guidelines for operationalizing, the majority of the institutions may nd it difficult to implement.
Another interesting example is ‘cross-border collaboration’. Looking into the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals(SDGs), particularly SDG 17 i.e., partnership for SDGs, it is quite clear that innovative cross-border and cross-sectoral partnerships are essential to bringing cost-effective interventions for classes and masses. This also applies to the higher education sector. The NEP 2020 also highlights the need for internationalization. The country can gain a significant advantage through extending and supporting the innovative knowledge partnerships in countries in the Global South, but the conventional regulations, restricting the potential in the name of ‘perceived quality and ‘ranking myopia’ are challenging the future path in this direction.
Within the country also, innovative partnerships can help in solving many resource-related challenges in our universities and colleges. Out of more than 1,000 universities in the country, hardly 20 to 25% are having full faculty strength. Many newcomers have serious resource-related challenges blocking their growth path. The time isto create ‘resource-sharing’ partnerships instead of competing like a business organization.
