Union Minister Dharmendra Pradhan: Opposition to National Education Policy is Purely Political

You took over as the Education Minister exactly one year after the implementation of the NEP. Now, five years on, what do you consider the major change the policy has brought to the sector?

The National Education Policy was officially implemented on July 29, 2020. However, due to the pandemic, we effectively had four years to put it into practice. The NEP marks a significant paradigm shift, emphasizing two key areas: it is deeply rooted in Indian values, ethos, and civilization, while simultaneously being futuristic, looking beyond immediate horizons. A large segment of India’s population is currently young, a demographic trend expected to continue for the next three decades. Our priority areas, such as mother tongue-based education, skill-based learning, and a multidisciplinary approach, are crucial for building a just and equitable society. Quality education must be accessible to all. We have 250 million young people in schools across 1.4 million institutions, and nearly 50 million students in higher education, supported by approximately 1,200 universities and 50,000 colleges. Education falls under the Concurrent List, meaning both federal and state governments share primary responsibility. After five years of NEP implementation, I am confident that a broad consensus exists for this new approach, and the country is poised to implement it smoothly.

Throughout these years, there has been criticism that there were no discussions about NEP in Parliament. Regarding the language formula, there are concerns. States say the infrastructure burden is on them, and the Indian Knowledge System is being questioned on grounds that traditional knowledge may vary from State to State. How do you respond?

Opposition parties often criticize the NEP, but they should approach their interpretations and narratives more responsibly. The late Dr. K. Kasturirangan, a celebrated former ISRO chairman, tirelessly worked to build a national consensus on the NEP, engaging in extensive discussions with stakeholders across the country. Those who oppose the NEP do so purely for political reasons; in their own states, the fundamental spirit of the policy has been embraced. Regarding language, the NEP recommends using the mother tongue for learning and teaching during the preparatory and foundational stages. Is there any dissenting voice in this country from any opposition party on this aspect? Everyone supports early education in the mother tongue. Their opposition is political and, unfortunately, shouldn’t be happening. Society is observing these issues and desires more than just political narratives. When it comes to the Indian Knowledge System, a few individuals exhibit a ‘phobia’ towards Bharat, towards India, and towards the Bharatiya idea. They oppose it for the sake of opposing Western thought, but they represent a minuscule minority. The country has moved past this kind of narrative. The Government of India provides substantial funding to states through Centrally sponsored schemes, and states also allocate significant portions of their budgets. As Education Minister, I agree that both the Union and State Governments should invest more to adopt the new education model. We must also invest in technology; our vision is to connect every school to broadband within the next three years, and we have launched an AI Mission in India. Both states and the Union Government have distinct responsibilities, and we are fulfilling ours. Historically, our education system primarily focused on creating job seekers. Now, the aspiration is to foster job creation. This signifies the emergence of a knowledge-based society and economy. We are envisioning a knowledge-based education and economic system for our future society.

The U.S. decision to increase visa fees has created anxiety among students. How do you address this?

We have 50 million students in higher education. Out of these, only about a million pursue higher education overseas. That’s the reality. We must adapt to the evolving geopolitical landscape. This isn’t a new phenomenon; such shocks occur every two to three decades. It’s happening today, and it will happen again. However, as a responsible, progressive, and self-respecting nation, we have immense faith in our youth, our academics, and our institutions. We believe we can establish global standards right here in India. That is our current reality. India is poised for a significant leap, a major quantum jump.

You recently questioned the criteria of perception in NIRF rankings. Similarly, there were issues with NAAC accreditation. What should our ranking and accreditation framework be in the future?

The National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) and the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) are managed by autonomous bodies. However, the government acts as a custodian for students and society. Therefore, I must convey societal expectations to these independent organizations. They need to reform, and they are indeed reforming. The government is not trying to control everything; those days are long gone. The NIRF ranking must be objective, transparent, and open, with nothing to conceal. The government grants these institutions maximum autonomy, but they must operate transparently. Democracy thrives in an accountable society, and no institution is sacrosanct. While autonomous, they must improve their governance.

The role of Governors is closely linked to universities. Several Bills, especially those related to higher education, are pending with Governors. Another issue is the appointments of Vice-Chancellors and teachers. What should ideally be the role of a Governor?

Historically, even before Independence, Governors served as the heads of educational institutions in their respective provinces and later in states. This is a pre-Independence practice that should continue. Governors hold an esteemed, non-political office. The Governor’s office functions as a crucial link between the state and the Centre, and Governors are the custodians of the Indian Constitution and its value system. Currently, some states are attempting to dilute the Governor’s authority by appointing Chief Ministers or Education Ministers as Chancellors, a move that has not been accepted by the judiciary. This is a significant point of contention. There’s an argument that states provide funding for faculty, while Governors create obstacles. However, are you aware that in some states, a Chief Minister’s Office aide’s wife is being appointed as a Vice-Chancellor, completely bypassing all UGC rules for selecting a Vice-Chancellor or a Professor? If certain states wish to violate UGC norms, which are approved by the courts, and appoint their political cronies as Vice-Chancellors or Professors, should the Governor remain silent? If the Governor acts, some will object, questioning why the file is being held or why the Governor is posing questions to the state government. It’s important to consider both perspectives.

UDISE data shows nearly 2.5 million students aged between 3 and 11 dropped out in 2024-25. What corrective measures are you proposing?

This is a very crucial issue. Previously, the school entry age for Class I was five years. Now, the NEP recommends that the school age for Class I will be six. This will be preceded by three years of pre-school education, known as Balvatika 1, 2, and 3, which are run in mutual agreement with our Women and Child Welfare Department through Anganwadis. Balvatika 3 and onwards, up to Class 12, will be managed by formal schools. At the entry level today, we have almost 99% enrollment among children with registered birth certificates in their locality. The dropout rate primarily begins around the 10th grade, due to various socio-economic constraints. States have launched campaigns to address this, and it’s a challenge we are actively working on. By Class 12, education must be engaging and attractive, not a source of fear for young people.

Cases of student suicides in IITs, IIMs, and other institutions have raised serious concerns. How do you respond to this tragic trend?

The emergence of new jobs, such as gig workers and opportunities through schemes like Svanidhi, along with the construction of four crore houses, provision of water to 15 crore homes, and 11 crore Ujjwala Yojana connections, all contribute to job creation. Regarding mental wellness, I fully acknowledge this is a significant issue. I have never shied away from it. If a child, tragically, is no longer with us due to various reasons, it is my responsibility, and I cannot distance myself from it. I am a parent, a father. There are many underlying issues. We must prioritize sports and extracurricular activities, and foster more interpersonal learning. We need to explore new methods to address this challenge effectively.

What about the perception that reservations disadvantage general category students? And the ongoing debate on extending reservations to private institutions?

This is a constitutional responsibility. There has been a societal consensus, from the days of the Constituent Assembly until now, to uplift the deprived sections of society, necessitating affirmative action. This is our constitutional commitment, and the broader society accepts it. Prime Minister Narendra Modi was the first leader to extend reservations to economically weaker sections of the upper castes. We must acknowledge new social churnings, ensuring no segment of society feels isolated. Reservation in private institutions is a complex issue, and there’s a significant ongoing debate about it. Gradually, things are evolving. Who raises this question now? Often, it’s those who failed to fulfill their responsibilities during their long periods in governance. Their families ruled this country for extended durations but achieved little for the deprived, the poor, the SC, ST, and OBC communities. Now, they’ve become the new champions of social justice, posing these questions. However, if you examine the facts, many private institutions are already implementing reservations.

What is the second and third language in Hindi-speaking States?

The NEP does not mandate any specific language for anyone. From Classes I to V, there will be two languages: language as a subject and language as a medium of instruction. The medium of instruction will be the mother tongue or home language of the respective state. The choice of the second language is entirely up to the student. The policy does not impose any particular language. It’s a decision for the state. From Classes VI to X, there will be three languages. One will certainly be the mother tongue. The remaining two languages can be any language chosen by the student, but two out of the three must be Indian languages. Language is intended to be a bridge, not a divider. While some may view language as a political issue, for a policy, it serves as a unifying force.

How is the Ministry preparing the next generation for reduced opportunities abroad?

I respectfully disagree with this premise. We are not a banana republic; we are not dependent on any foreign institutions. We must navigate changing geopolitical situations. I cannot compromise on our national interest. National pride is paramount.

Many heartland languages, such as Bhojpuri and Maithili, are often subsumed under Hindi. What is the government doing to protect these local languages?

The Ministry of Education plans to develop teaching-learning materials for all 22 Indian scheduled languages. We must appreciate and understand the power of technology and multilingualism. The era where political narratives dictated language issues is over. The Prime Minister has declared that all languages are national languages. This is our strategic approach.

What is your advice to students unable to get U.S. visas?

I have immense confidence in our institutions. While I won’t be overly assertive on this matter, I am confident that our IITians, IIMs, NITians, and State university students are performing exceptionally well in the global economy. The Indian education system possesses vast depth and capacity. However, we must remain open, broad-minded, and willing to adopt global best practices. So, while we encourage students to explore opportunities abroad, we must also adapt to geopolitical realities.