By Ubahunlang Dkhar Tmar
Many have written and said enough about the NEP 2020 which is one of the core issues of the day across the country. There are various viewpoints and counterpoints that have their own legitimacy and flaws. Like all policies especially the ones that dealt with overhauling of any systems it requires time to adapt to the changes, with numerous tweaks and improvements along the way. Those who have read or browsed through the 66 pages NEP 2020 document will know the humongous task that entails if the NEP 2020 is to be implemented in both letter and spirit. There are no specified ‘short-cuts’ or ‘fast-food’ approaches in the document/policy. Every sentence and paragraph in the document is loaded with directions and procedures accompanied by flowery language, easy to understand that grasps the reader’s attention. To understand the NEP 2020 in its entirety we have to read, ‘in between the lines’ to gather certain nuggets of the philosophy (educational, political and economic philosophy) of this document.
The future of our state/country and society lies sorely on how we implement this education policy, taking into account the diversity of the nation; from the local, regional to the national. We all know that education is one of the most important sectors. Many countries who are ahead now have adopted and spent more (6% + of GDP) on the education sector. Education is also an asset (human resource, human capital) and it has multifarious impacts which range from the individual to societal, economic, ecology and so on. It is education that will define our individual and collective future. Any state or country that neglects education and initiates ‘half-baked’ ‘ill-conceived’ approaches will reap havoc and chaos in the near future. The 21st century is a critical episode in human history.
NEP 2020: State
Conundrum:
To implement the NEP 2020, I believe is not only the prerogative of the VC of NEHU but also that of the State Government too, since education falls under the concurrent list. I am not an expert in constitutional law or jurisprudence to say who has the upper hand. But commonsense dictates a democratic logic that if only the VC who represents the Centre agrees to the immediate implementation, it is only a 50% decision. We need the State Government too to fall in line. So far, the State Government has been evasive. Nirmala Sitharam, the Union Finance Minister, categorically said that the “NEP 2020 is flexible and is not imposed on States by the Centre. States can adopt the policy according to their requirements” (The Economic Times 17/8/23). Further, for a proper implementation of the Policy it requires all the stakeholders to agree and come together; the most important stakeholders are the teachers. Democracy should prevail not authoritarianism.
At present we are in a conundrum. We only see the diplomatic silence of the State Government, the unilateral move of VC and OSD of NEHU for immediate implementation, the unheard voices of the Principal’s Council and the vocalization of the MCTA on the hurried implementation of the NEP which is related to higher education. This stalemate has created confusion among the students and parents. Again, those who voice their agreement with implementing the NEP now (2023) it would seem have not studied the 66 pages NEP 2020 document properly and comparing it with the ground realities. Further they have not provided valid justification. Those who are against the immediate implementation of NEP have provided valid justification which can be attributed to certain ground realities (academic, infrastructural, linkages-cluster, rural-urban divide etc.).
It will be an anomaly if in the same State we have two undergraduate courses and policies running under the same University. We cannot deprive the students of the colleges in the rural areas, even if some of the urban based colleges are ready for NEP 2020. Are there any data driven assessment of the academic and infrastructural capacity of the colleges under different managements and funding in both urban and rural areas? It is a normal practice that we never invite people for a wedding, birthday, without first planning and preparing for seating arrangements, food items etc. It also seems that the term ‘physical planning’ (spatial efficiency, cluster-linkages, Pupil-Teacher ratio etc.,) has vanished from the vocabulary of those in authority.
We are already at the end week of August 2023. By the first week of December 2023 all students will be appearing for the examinations. The Government as the state authority must take the ultimate decision and handle this stalemate, bearing in mind that the NEP 2020 document page 41 has highlighted its responsibilities. The MCTA and the VC of NEHU have stated their stand on the NEP2020. We must know, that someday the VC of NEHU will go; the government will also change. Therefore who will carry the burden if the NEP 2020 is not implemented correctly. It is the students, parents, teachers and the institutions (colleges, schools) that will have to shoulder the burden.
Political Narrative:
Again, there is a false narrative that has perpetrated on social media that the teaching community (in this context the MCTA) are against NEP 2020. This is absolute falsehood. It seems that someone or interested parties are politicising this issue as a contestation of powers and authority. When it comes to education, the teachers (school, college) know better. They are the ones who are in the field of educating the students from diverse backgrounds with different capacities and capabilities. Teachers’ expertise, knowledge, experiences have to be taken into account and considered. Teaching is a demanding profession; it is not only about giving notes and lectures. There are a host of duties, multiple committees, paper writing, paper setting, evaluation, scrutiny, research, college programmes; cultural, academic workshop, seminars, sports, college week, NAAC, NIRF data accumulation, presentation, projects etc. Teaching is not a cakewalk in this present century. It is not only about Teaching but Learning (Learn, Relearn, Unlearn) too.
Right now, there are unfounded fear-based narratives that have been peddled around that if we do not implement NEP immediately, we will put our students in difficulty. What kind of difficulty nobody knows for it is only a hypothetical conjecture. Again, there are those who have given general observations/opinions, that compare our students with other students from other states and say they lack exposure to multiple papers resulting in CUET failure, failure in civil services etc. These issues can only be confirmed by experts in pedagogy because there is a difference between correlation and causations. Just because students are not exposed to many papers, we cannot conclude that they failed in their CUET, civil services etc. This is not a valid comprehensive data-driven based argument and justification. The failure of our education system is systemic and encompass government policies, institutions and society. We cannot conclude and justify anything without empirical evidence and by using anecdotal evidences.
Education (Academic
and Vocational):
There is a difference between the term ‘academic’ and ‘vocational’ and also there is a clear-cut variation between the word skill (skilled) and education (educated). The present NEP 2020 has blended both of them in one single course – the Four Year Undergraduate Programme (FYUP). The reason behind this is to cater to the demands of the economy for we need skilled manpower. The other is to expose the students to a holistic and multi-disciplinary aspects of education. In short, this is the Americanization of our education system and to a common person, the FYUP is like a buffet where you can select any food item that you like and digest at your own time and space, where at the end you only got a collective taste with no deep appreciation and experiences of a particular item. From a pedagogical and philosophical point of view there will be several viewpoints and educated opinions about this system of education. Fifteen years down the line we will know what kind of citizens we will have and whether all of them will be employable? Those who have taught the present semester system and the previous annual system before 2015 will know better, that the present semester system has harmed education (the true purpose of being educated). I also feel that if the FYUP is converted into an annual system instead of the present semester system, students will be able to digest and comprehend better on the course/subjects that they chose. Because learning and comprehension takes time.
To conclude, our education system should also cater to both the local, regional and national context (economy, ecology, society), therefore in the NEP 2020 document, the policy framers also stressed on including the ‘local context’ while framing the syllabus/curriculum. Has our curriculum incorporated the ‘local context’?
To those who are in a hurry to implement the NEP2020 right away, have they thought and meditated properly about the true spirit, function of education and the purpose of the right kind of relevant vocational education? We have to find a collective solution to the present friction.