The National Education Policy (NEP) faces criticism for its perceived intent to dismantle public education in favor of a private system, exemplified by centralized examinations that disadvantage state board students, the expansion of the coaching industry, and the restructuring of higher education. This restructuring involves a shift from government grants to loan-based financing for universities, potentially leading to higher fees and reduced infrastructure. A major point of contention is the National Testing Agency (NTA), which is blamed for persistent paper leaks due to its lack of accountability under the Societies Registration Act. Furthermore, the policy's emphasis on technology-driven testing has resulted in numerous technical failures and exam disruptions. The article argues that education should remain a public responsibility, advocating for public investment and federal diversity in admissions rather than market-driven approaches and centralized testing.

The National Education Policy (NEP) faces criticism for its perceived intent to dismantle public education in favor of a private system, exemplified by centralized examinations that disadvantage state board students, the expansion of the coaching industry, and the restructuring of higher education. This restructuring involves a shift from government grants to loan-based financing for universities, potentially leading to higher fees and reduced infrastructure. A major point of contention is the National Testing Agency (NTA), which is blamed for persistent paper leaks due to its lack of accountability under the Societies Registration Act. Furthermore, the policy's emphasis on technology-driven testing has resulted in numerous technical failures and exam disruptions. The article argues that education should remain a public responsibility, advocating for public investment and federal diversity in admissions rather than market-driven approaches and centralized testing.

The National Education Policy (NEP) faces criticism for its perceived intent to dismantle public education in favor of a private system, exemplified by centralized examinations that disadvantage state board students, the expansion of the coaching industry, and the restructuring of higher education. This restructuring involves a shift from government grants to loan-based financing for universities, potentially leading to higher fees and reduced infrastructure. A major point of contention is the National Testing Agency (NTA), which is blamed for persistent paper leaks due to its lack of accountability under the Societies Registration Act. Furthermore, the policy's emphasis on technology-driven testing has resulted in numerous technical failures and exam disruptions. The article argues that education should remain a public responsibility, advocating for public investment and federal diversity in admissions rather than market-driven approaches and centralized testing.

CHANGEMAKERS

THERE IS A POPULAR argument that the National Education Policy is good, but has just been implemented poorly. But, by design, it seeks to destroy public education and set up in its place a private education system. The centralisation of examinations that forces state board students to compete with CBSE students in unequal conditions, the expansion of the coaching mafia and the restructuring of higher education have all happened within the ambit of the NEP.

The policy draws inspiration from the American model, where higher education is deeply intertwined with debt. The changing financial model of public universities is evidence. The system of grants from the University Grants Commission has been replaced by loans through institutions like the Higher Education Financing Agency. Universities are now expected to repay those loans. The consequences are inevitable: increased fees, reduced infrastructure spending and higher fines on students.

The debate over education reforms cannot be separated from the larger issue of the National Testing Agency. The recently introduced legislative changes are trying to cure a heart attack with band-aid. It is impossible to address recurring paper leaks without dismantling the NTA. Created under the Societies Registration Act rather than through an Act of Parliament, it is not subject to the same accountability mechanisms as statutory government bodies. This allows responsibility to be deflected whenever failures occur. If there is a paper leak and you ask the Union education minister to resign, the response is that the ministry does not conduct the examinations—the NTA does. But it was this government that created the NTA, so responsibility ultimately rests with it.

The NEP’s emphasis on technology-driven testing has expanded computer-based examinations, which have repeatedly suffered from technical failures. There are instances where students were made to wait for hours because examination servers failed, only to be sent home without clarity on when their tests would be rescheduled. Even during the height of the nationwide protests, when the government was under immense pressure to ensure smooth examinations, glitches and allegations of paper leaks continued. The system has lapsed to such an extent that even when the government wants examinations to be conducted properly, they cannot be.

Education should remain a public responsibility rather than becoming increasingly market-driven. Universities should receive public investment instead of being pushed towards debt-financed expansion, while admissions should reflect India’s federal diversity rather than relying on increasingly centralised testing mechanisms. From this perspective, the repeated examination controversies are not isolated incidents but symptoms of a deeper structural problem. Unless the institutional framework itself is reconsidered, reforms aimed only at tightening procedures or increasing penalties will fail to address the underlying crisis.

Neha Bora is president of the All India Students’ Association

As told to Badar Bashir

TAGS