Tamil Nadu constituting a committee to draft its own State education policy may be construed as a challenge to the national education policy, though it may actually do good for States to draft their education policy. It may guide them to give effect to the national educational policy in a considered, well thought out manner. State, district, block and even village level policies could enable a more meaningful implementation of the national policy as it may lead to a policy stack that serves the goals of national growth grounded in the local contexts. The aspirational districts programmes show the possibilities of local meshing with the whole.
What is disquieting here is the intention to evolve a counter education policy for the State. The concerns raised by the States, often strident, could be many: insistence on a third language, elitist tilt devoid of concerns for the weaker and downtrodden sections, imposed by the Centre sans regard to their needs and misgivings. Even though the NEP 2020 is claimed to be a culmination of the largest public consultation in policy history, the process of consultation and curating the mass contributions, being new, lacked clear articulation of outcomes and evolution of the policy.
The grouse became graver because the final draft of the policy wasn’t discussed and deliberated in the Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE). Chaired by the Union Education Minister and with Ministers of Education of all the States and educationists as its members, it provides an effective way for the key stakeholders to express their views, particularly if the need is to evolve a national education policy rather than that of the central government alone. CABE consultation has been deemed essential to building purpose and context-led policies, and deeper policy engagement, and thus ensure alignment along the policy pile from the grassroots to the idealists.
