In a notable shift, Kerala, which initially stood with Tamil Nadu and West Bengal in refusing to sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the Centrally sponsored PM SHRI (PM Schools for Rising India) education scheme, has now officially become a signatory. PM SHRI schools are intended to demonstrate the implementation of the National Education Policy 2020 (NEP), a policy that Kerala has consistently and vehemently criticized.
What is PM SHRI?
Launched in 2022, the PM SHRI initiative aims to establish 14,500 model schools across the country that exemplify various aspects of the NEP. The scheme has a total budget of ₹27,360 crore, with the Central government contributing ₹18,128 crore over a five-year period. Initially, 33 states and Union Territories had signed the MoU. With Kerala’s recent decision, the number now stands at 34, leaving only Tamil Nadu and West Bengal yet to ink the agreement.
Why is Kerala opposed to the NEP?
The Communist Party of India (Marxist)-led Left Democratic Front (LDF) government in Kerala views the Union Government’s enforcement of the NEP as a reflection of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) right-wing agenda. They contend that the NEP is exclusionary and could lead to the communalization, commercialization, privatization, and centralization of the education sector. These concerns are further intensified by perceived attempts to ‘rewrite the country’s history’ by the Union Government, which they believe would undermine secularism, scientific thought, and Constitutional values.
Why did Kerala ink the PM SHRI agreement now?
The Union Government had withheld ₹456.01 crore due to Kerala under the flagship Samagra Shiksha education scheme for the 2025-26 financial year, citing the state’s refusal to join the PM SHRI initiative. Additionally, Kerala was yet to receive ₹513.54 crore for 2024-25 and ₹188.58 crore for the 2023-24 financial year, bringing the total outstanding funds to a staggering ₹1,158.13 crore.
General Education Minister V. Sivankutty emphasized that nearly 40 lakh students from marginalized communities attending government and aided schools were directly impacted by the withholding of these education funds. Critical benefits for approximately 5.6 lakh Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe students, as well as specialized support, therapies, and assistive devices for 1.8 lakh differently-abled students, faced disruptions. The delays also affected the distribution of free uniforms and textbooks, allowances for female students, pre-primary education, teacher training, and the smooth conduct of examinations. By signing the MoU for PM SHRI, the state is now set to receive these accumulated arrears along with two years of PM SHRI funds, totaling an estimated ₹1,476.13 crore. Post-agreement, the Samagra Shiksha Kerala program has been assured of ₹971 crore.
How does the Kerala Government explain the shift from holding out to becoming a signatory to PM SHRI?
Minister for General Education V. Sivankutty described the decision as a tactical maneuver to overcome the Union Government’s withholding of crucial school education funds. He underscored that the Kerala Government cannot afford to sacrifice funds designated for Samagra Shiksha and other projects, especially considering the state’s prevailing financial crunch.
The Minister highlighted that while the Union Government had stated in October 2022 that the Samagra Shiksha scheme’s objective was to implement the NEP, Kerala continued to receive Central funds until 2023. During this period, the state successfully implemented schemes that prioritized its own interests and educational principles, a stance from which it affirms there will be no deviation.
Does this mean the State’s stance on the NEP has changed?
Minister Sivankutty affirmed that Kerala will persist in its ideological opposition to what it perceives as the Union Government’s agenda to infuse RSS ideologies into education. However, he acknowledged that the state cannot indefinitely oppose the National Education Policy 2020. He cited the example of Kerala’s Higher Education Department, which joined the PM-USHA scheme on the condition of implementing the NEP. Yet, the state has largely maintained its own vision in higher education, implementing less than 30% of the Central policy’s provisions. The State Government also points out that many NEP provisions, such as those concerning pre-primary education, teacher empowerment, 100% enrollment, and the three-language formula, were already integral to Kerala’s educational system long before the NEP’s formal introduction.
How does it respond to concerns over communalizing the curriculum if NEP is implemented?
The government firmly states that the state is responsible for determining its own curriculum. It highlights that the NEP itself allows states to develop their curriculum frameworks in alignment with the new pedagogical structure. Kerala’s Curriculum Framework (KCF) 2023 was specifically designed to integrate national-level changes while upholding secular, democratic, scientific, and Constitutional values, which are clearly reflected in its published textbooks. The government assures that any NEP provision conflicting with the state’s core educational interests will not be adopted.
What does the government say about the MoU clause that states will implement NEP provisions in their entirety?
The government clarifies that, according to the MoU, PM SHRI schools are permitted to follow State curriculum frameworks developed in accordance with the NEP’s new curricular and pedagogical structure. The Kerala Curriculum Framework (KCF) 2023 has already been updated to align with national changes, and the state’s textbooks reflect these revised frameworks. Crucially, the government reiterates its commitment not to implement any NEP provision that contradicts the state’s established educational interests.
Why has the Communist Party of India, an LDF coalition partner, opposed the signing of the MoU?
The Communist Party of India (CPI), a significant coalition partner in the LDF government, has consistently opposed the signing of the MoU. The issue had been brought before the State Cabinet twice without reaching a conclusive decision. The General Education Department’s sudden move to sign the agreement has reportedly caused considerable dissatisfaction within the CPI, as they were not consulted or informed of the final decision.