Four year degree course and teachers training programs, primary education in mother tongue and restructuring of school education in 5+3+3+4 (para 4.1), emphasis on research and critical thinking are also appreciable steps. But if ‘4’ is divided in 2+2, it takes away flexibility of ‘4’. While there is much talk of reducing board exam phobia, continuous evaluation is important missing point. Preparation of policy has seen six years and three cabinet ministers. Implementation will be more challenging.

Let us have a look at timeline as proposed in policy document. The policy aims for Comprehensive National Curriculum Framework for Teacher Education and National Professional Standards for Teachers (NPST) (para 5.20) to be ready by 2022, universal foundational literacy and numeracy in primary school (para 2.2) and exposure to vocational education to at least 50% of learners through the school and higher education system education (para 16.5) by 2025. 100% Gross Enrolment Ratio (para 3.1) in preschool to secondary level, 4-year integrated B.Ed. minimum degree qualification for teaching (para 5.23), teacher education into multidisciplinary colleges and universities (para 5.22), one large multidisciplinary higher education institute in or near every district (para 10.8), institutions offering professional or general education to evolve into institutions/clusters (para 20.2) offering both by 2030, and all higher education institutions (para 10.7) to become multidisciplinary institutions by 2040. The time line of implementation is unfairly long. Any political or ideological deviations may derail the process of implementation. Therefore it is suggested that before 2024, at least legislative changes for institutional framework may be completed and institutions be put in place. Once institutions are put in place, they can ensure implementation.

I want to draw attention towards vocational education as treated by NEP 2020. It is heartening to note that the policy aims to change the general perception of it being inferior to mainstream education; also the policy aims to integrate vocational education with main stream education. It promises (in para 3.1) for concerted national effort for quality vocational education along with holistic education, from pre-school to Grade 12. The policy assures of beginning of vocational exposure at early ages in middle and secondary school and integration of quality vocational education into higher education. It further states that by 2025, at least 50% of learners through the school and higher education system shall have exposure to vocational education (para 16.5). According to NEP2020, areas for vocational education will be decided on the basis of skills gap analysis and mapping of local opportunities (para 16.6).

NEP2020 has explained as to how it will integrate vocational education with school education and higher education and improve its quality. For this purpose, a National Committee for the Integration of Vocational Education (NCIVE), having experts from across the ministries and industries would be constituted by MHRD (para 16.6). It is also noteworthy that National Higher Education Qualification Framework (NHEQF) will be formulated by the GEC, in sync with the National Skills Qualifications Framework (NSQF) (para 18.6) to ease the integration of vocational education into higher education. The policy promises to further work out details of NSQF for each discipline and vocation and it will also align Indian Standards with that of the International Standard Classification of Occupations maintained by the International Labour Organization (para 16.8). To improve the quality of trainers, National Professional Standards for Teachers (NPST) will also be developed, in consultation with stakeholders (para 5.20).

Vocational Education of NEP1986 was imprisoned in intellectual/ bureaucratic ‘vocationalization of education’, it could never mature to vocational education. Here the word ‘exposure’ is a point of concern as it can be interpreted differently from ‘being informed’ to ‘given experience’ but it does not include practice or expertize. Surprisingly, an ‘exposure’ from pre-school to Grade 12 would be turned into ‘quality’ vocational education in higher education. The policy genuinely appears to be worried about 5% vocationally qualified Indian work force in comparison with the 52% in USA, 75% in Germany, and 96% in South Korea (para 16.1). The ‘exposure’ may shoot up the numbers but may push ‘quality’ in background. It is also nowhere made clear which level or competence would be treated as vocationally qualified.

Local employment is western idea where at every 50 to 100 km there are business or industrial employment clusters. That is inappropriate for India. In India there are states after states where there is no employment opportunity. What is future skill need in eastern UP, Bihar, Bengal, most of NE states, most of Chhattisgarh etc, which have large immigration to other states, is different from that of other states. Therefore, vocational education must be linked to employment clusters, studying migration patterns. Skill gap analysis and their mapping is another challenge. General Education Council may learn lessons from skill gap analysis carried out by NSDC and their application in design and development of training programs.

Learning for Ministry of Skill Development:

1. MSDE, NCVET, DGT, NSDC, SSCs every institution is engaged with standard setting, affiliation, accreditation, curriculum development, assessment and certification, directly or indirectly. No specialist institution is being created. MSDE may also create institutional framework based on division of labour i.e. verticals similar to GEC, NAC etc.

2. NEP2020 has envisaged National Higher Education Qualification Framework (NHEQF) in sync with the National Skills Qualifications Framework (NSQF) to ease the integration of vocational education into higher education. MSDE may have to rework on course curriculum so that trainees get appropriate exemption and entry in higher education courses.

3. MSDE can set up Professional Standards for Trainers, Curriculum Framework for Trainer’s Training Program and implement learner-centric pedagogy and application of technology in training.Presently, SSC, trainers training programs are of the order of days and hours and under DGT they are of one year duration. Duration of trainers training programs may be increased and integrated trainers training may be explored. Difference in level of competence between learner and trainer are also point of consideration.

4. Secondary schools will also collaborate with ITIs, polytechnics, local industry, etc, to enhance vocational capabilities of students and teachers. Training Institutes under MSDE may also collaborate with schools to supplement academic inputs.

5. National Education Policy 2020 envisions to transform India into vibrant knowledge society. MSDE may examine if their courses have sufficient content on life skills such as literacy, numeracy, financial literacy, digital literacy, commercial skills, health care and awareness to make their trainees active citizen rather than ‘worker’.

6. NEP2020, proposes moving towards a semester or modular system to enable greater flexibility. Will MSDE reconsider introducing semester system in ITI? Semester systems puts an end to admissions just before examinations for favours.

7. NEP2020 has thought of hub and spoke model for Skill labs for schools. MSDE may also consider it between ITI and NSDC partners in a district for better utilization of resources.