Pen trumps sword, but does it trump politics? As the new academic year begins in Karnataka, schools, colleges, and universities across the state are confused whether to follow the National Education Policy or the State Education Policy.
The Karnataka government, led by the Congress, has resisted the implementation of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, which was intended to be enacted in various states.
Other non-BJP-ruled southern states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala have also opposed the NEP through resolutions in respective Assemblies. The emphasis is on swiftly implementing an inclusive, non-partisan, and updated policy to prevent confusion between SEP and NEP.
The Siddaramaiah government officially announced that a special committee would be formed to reassess the previous education policy and develop its own updated educational plan, referred to as the State Education Policy (SEP).
This plan is set to be put into effect in the next academic year of 2024, pending the formulation of the new SEP by a newly appointed committee under the state government.
During his budget speech, Siddaramaiah declared his government’s intention to withdraw from the NEP and instead create a policy more relevant to the state’s context. He emphasised that the NEP is “ill-suited” for India’s diverse landscape and doesn’t align well with the federal governance system.
So, what is the difference between the NEP and the SEP?
The NEP, introduced by the central government in 2020, aims to render education more flexible, student-centred, and outcome-oriented, according to education experts who were part of the multi-member committee responsible for drafting the NEP-2020. This policy covers education from the elementary to higher education levels, including post-graduation.
The argument put forth by the Karnataka government is that the NEP doesn’t consider the specific needs of the state and is driven more by political motives than educational principles. Critics also highlight that the NEP mandates Hindi as a compulsory language, which states like Karnataka reject as a political move that imposes the language on non-Hindi-speaking states.
Given that Karnataka has its own language, Kannada, the argument is that it should be the primary or secondary language for students in the state.
Moreover, the NEP proposes a standardised entrance exam for higher education institutions, which the Karnataka government believes would disadvantage rural students.
The SEP is intended to address these concerns and ensure high-quality education that respects the state’s culture, values, and language. The Karnataka government has assured the public that the new policy will consider these concerns and come up with an education policy that is in the best interest of all students.
Noted academician Niranjan Aradhya talked about why the NEP is not acceptable to states that oppose it. “Now it is completely opposite, too much centralisation, too much imposition, getting into minute details like what children need to do in the classroom; this is too much. Therefore, there is a need for SEP,” he said.
“The NEP was framed by the central government in an unconstitutional and undemocratic way, not really respecting the Constitution and the federal structure. Many states who believe in the federal structure are opposing the policy and framing their own state education policies,” Aradhya said, adding that the SEP is formulated exclusively for the state domain to implement. The SEP will be framed and discussed in the assembly and then be put into effect.
He also pointed out that those who have opposed NEP feel that it has become a toolkit to promote political agenda, which is why there is so much opposition. “Otherwise when policy was formed in 1968, 1979, 1986 and 1992 (revised), why was there no opposition? It was done in a democratic manner,” he said.
Asked how different the NEP-2020 is from the previous SEPs, he said: “Earlier, the Centre was taking all states into confidence more and followed a very democratic process and it was within the constitutional framework, particularly in the process of framing it and also in terms of implementing it — be it 1968, 1979, 1986 and then 1992. All these policies were placed in parliament for discussion and, later, it was placed before the Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE), an apex body for education issues. Now that is not being followed.”
Supporters of the NEP, meanwhile, argue that it is a progressive and student-friendly policy that could benefit Karnataka if implemented.
Prof B Thimmegowda, former vice-chairman of the Karnataka Higher Education Council, suggests that changing education policies right after a change in government is detrimental to students. He argues that the merits and drawbacks can be debated, but outright scrapping of the policy serves no purpose.
“States like Kerala have framed their own SEP, but if you read it carefully, it is 95% similar to the NEP… The NEP will not only be beneficial for students with its provision for multiple exits and multiple entries, but will surely be a gamechanger, especially for girls and boys who may face the challenge of leaving their education midway. There is a provision for multiple exit and entry points that could significantly benefit students, especially those who face challenges interrupting their education and wish to return to complete their studies,” he said.
“In the normal course, we keep revising the syllabus. Do we continue to have the old syllabus?… There have been global changes. Jobs are today being taken over by machines and we need to look for new skills and jobs. Therefore, our educational transformation is a dynamic process. If you follow the old pattern of syllabus, when do we switch over to the global pattern? The NEP is to empower the children to face the world and get the best opportunities with all the necessary skills,” he explained.
Be it NEP or SEP, education should not be one of the pawns on a political chessboard.
