GCMUN Conference 2025

Lok Sabha STUDY GUIDE

Reforms in India's Exam-Centric Education System: Building Equity, Access, and

At the outset, on behalf of the Executive Board, I extend a warm welcome to all of you and
congratulate you on being a part of the Lok Sabha being simulated at GCMUN. The
committee being simulated would, unlike most other simulations you must have heard of or
been a part of, focus on political intellect, logical intellect, analytical application of thoughts,
and strategic application of thoughts in addressing the issues at hand.

Kindly note, we are not looking for existing (impractical) solutions or statements that would
be a copy-paste of what the person you are representing has already stated; instead, we seek
an out-of-the-box solution from you, while knowing and understanding the impending
limitations of the person you represent.

This introductory guide would be as abstract as possible and would just give you a basic
perspective on what you can expect from the committee and areas wherein your research
should be focused at this given point in time. Given the political and volatile nature of the
agendas of the committee, your presence of mind and analytical aptitude are qualities that we
at the Executive Board would be looking to test.

Kindly do not limit your research to the areas highlighted herein, but ensure that you logically
deduce and push your research to areas associated with and in addition to the issues
mentioned.

The objective of this background guide is to provide you with a “background” of the issue at
hand; therefore, it might seem to some as not being comprehensive enough. We feel that
“study guides” are detrimental to the individual growth of the delegate since they overlook a
very important part of this activity, which is research. We are sure, however, that this
background guide gives you a perfect launching pad to start with your research.

This guide shall deal with a skeletal overview of the agenda. The delay is intentional as we do
not want to spoon-feed you with the research.

Just to let you know, the content provided in the BG is a compilation of various research and
literary works of various authors and thinkers blended with the intellect of the Executive
Board. It is to be noted that the content provided below in no way reflects the personal
ideologies of the Executive Board and has been prepared keeping in mind a neutral point of
view. Wishing you all very good luck.

Avinash Tripathy – Speaker Hriday Adani – Deputy Speaker

The Indian education system has placed significant importance on technical knowledge,
science, and traditional academic disciplines, overlooking other areas such as sports, arts,
research, and innovation. A great example of this systemic neglect is the journey of Neeraj
Chopra, India's renowned javelin thrower and Olympic gold medallist. Despite his
exceptional talent, Neeraj faced challenges in accessing appropriate training facilities and
support from India. To fulfill his full potential, he had to seek world-class training and
infrastructure in countries like South Africa and Turkey. This points toward a profound issue
where non-traditional fields lack the recognition, resources, and support they rightfully
deserve.

Furthermore, a similar concern exists in the field of research and innovation. The Indian
education system often prioritizes rote learning and examination scores over critical thinking
and creativity. This neglect of research and innovation has hindered countless opportunities
for groundbreaking discoveries and technological progress. It is crucial to acknowledge that
cultivating a culture of innovation can significantly contribute to the nation’s economic and
social development.

Emphasizing research and innovative problem-solving can clear the way for Indian startups,
which have already started to redefine the economy. Companies like Swiggy, Zomato, and
Hotstar are examples of how innovation and entrepreneurial thinking can create solutions that
not only address societal needs but also generate employment and boost economic growth.
However, these success stories are the exceptions rather than the rule, primarily because our
education system fails to equip students with the skills, mindset, and support necessary for
innovation and development.

This report aims to highlight the reforms required in the Indian education system to create a
more balanced, inclusive, and forward-thinking framework. By providing equal opportunities
in sports, arts, and research, and by encouraging innovation and creativity, India can
empower its youth to excel in diverse fields and transform challenges into opportunities. A
reformed education system will not only nurture individual talent but also lay the foundation
for an innovative and self-reliant nation.

Indian education, in comparison to foreign education, is more rigid and focuses more on
theoretical knowledge. Foreign education provides a variety of subjects to choose from. More
emphasis is given to interactive learning and student-centric methods of teaching in foreign
universities. Due to a lack of proper resources for higher studies, research, and innovation, a
large number of students migrate to developed countries. These developed countries not only
offer good education but also better lifestyles, which lure them to settle there. The country
that provided basic education to students who migrated to other countries for higher
education and settled there does not get anything in return from them, and one of the main
culprits is the lack of proper higher education. Mostly Indian students tend to migrate to the
USA, UK, Canada, Germany, and other European countries in search of higher education.
Taking the case of the USA, there has been a hike from 50K to 200K students who migrated
from India for their higher education.
Talking about the ranking at the global level, universities around the world are ranked based
on the quality of education they provide, surveys of people considering studying in
universities in a particular country, and opportunities those countries’ education systems
provide to students. India stands at 33rd rank according to the 2020 survey. Still, there is
progressive growth in education in India. In 2018, it stood at 40th rank, and in 2019 it stood
at 35th. Though the progress is slow, this consecutive change proves that India is trying to
push itself up and stand among the greatest.

National Education Policy – Concerns or Criticisms

The National Education Policy (2020) has faced criticism and scrutiny from various authors
for a multitude of reasons. For instance, Varma et al. (2021) highlighted numerous challenges
associated with implementing NEP 2020, including the necessity for cooperation from states,
the need for strong willpower to secure adequate funding, insufficient basic infrastructure, a
shortage of human resources, complexities in selecting a medium of instruction in schools
with diverse mother tongues, and more.

In a survey of college students, Arun et al. (2022) noted several challenges of NEP 2020,
including an overburdening syllabus, lack of infrastructure, focus on regional languages,
disparities in human resources between rural and urban areas, and concerns regarding
ensuring quality education.

Many experts have raised concerns regarding the adequacy of financial resources and
necessary infrastructure for effective implementation of the policy. K. Kumar et al. (2021)
emphasized that developed nations allocate as much as 20% of their GDP toward education.
To align the Indian education sector with global standards, India would also need to
significantly increase its expenditure on education. However, achieving the proposed changes
outlined in NEP 2020, such as constructing new physical infrastructure and developing digital
and technological resources, as well as modernizing existing government structures into
contemporary higher education facilities, would be a huge task demanding substantial
investments and an extended period for implementation.

Concerns about the policy’s promotion of utopian aspirations, such as the establishment of
digital libraries, modern digitally enabled classrooms, and the introduction of digital literacy
and coding in underdeveloped rural educational institutions, have been raised. In their critical
analysis of the policy, Deep and Singh (2022) highlighted that insufficient financial
resources, inadequate attention to teacher welfare, and accessibility issues concerning modern
technology could present significant challenges in the implementation of the policy.

Menon (2020) also noted that a drastic increase in enrolment in higher education institutions
without adequate funding would not help to realize the stated objectives. In a separate study
examining the emphasis of NEP on children with disabilities, Anant Athavale et al. (2021)
regarded NEP 2020 as overly ambitious and utopian as it overlooks the harsh reality that
many Indian schools are severely understaffed to accommodate changes necessary for
students with disabilities. Additionally, they noted the lack of preparedness among instructors
to undertake specialized duties and to establish individual-accessible alternative
homeschooling systems.

In addition to the lack of funding and infrastructure, several authors have also questioned the
absence of detailed strategic plans, noting it as a hurdle in the effective implementation of the
policy. While discussing the political and economic perspective of NEP 2020, Haragopal
(2020) argued that the policy lacks alignment with the vision outlined in the Constitution of
India. The author highlighted the imbalance in NEP’s focus on vocational education, which
deviates from the previous emphasis on providing general education to students until Class
10, suggesting that a well-rounded education is essential as society necessitates individuals to
be both skilled and adequately educated.
Further, Muralidharan et al. (2022) have argued that a customer-centric education system may
destroy the fundamental essence of education considering the various moral, ethical, and
cultural issues in it. Lindqvist et al. (2021) raised doubts about the sustainability of the 4-year
degree programs proposed under NEP 2020, citing the example of the now-scrapped 4-year
undergraduate program at Delhi University.

Soni (2021) proposed that the NEP 2020 framework lacks three crucial pillars: infrastructure,
funding, and a well-detailed strategic plan, which contributes to the complexity of its
implementation. Kannan (2021) emphasized the numerous challenges hindering the
realization of NEP 2020 objectives, encompassing issues such as absence of universal access
to higher education, the limited autonomy for teachers and institutions to innovate,
inadequate career advancement mechanisms, the dearth of research and innovation,
substandard governance and leadership at higher education institutions, compromised
regulation, costly digital infrastructure development, and inadequate internet connectivity for
digital learning. These obstacles collectively impede the successful implementation of NEP
2020.
A work by Govinda (2020) has criticized NEP 2020 for being immersed in abstract concepts,
acronyms, and prosaic imagination, away from the real educational landscape encompassing
individuals and institutions along with their limitations. The disparity between the proposed
ideas and the present realities poses a hindrance for the effective implementation of the
policy. The author suggested that the policy needs to focus on ensuring basic infrastructure,
academic resources, and an adequate number of qualified teachers for better realization of its
objectives.

There are apprehensions about the potential exacerbation of centre-state conflicts due to the
policy’s centralized approach. In a study, Batra (2020) observed that implementing a
standardized and centrally controlled system could intensify conflicts between the central and
state governments. This is particularly pertinent in a linguistically and culturally diverse
nation like India, where the primary constitutional responsibility for education lies with the
state governments.

The past studies expressed apprehensions regarding the shortage of skilled educators, citing it
as a significant obstacle to the successful implementation of NEP. They emphasize the critical
importance of well-trained teachers in realizing the objectives outlined in the policy.
Sengupta (2021) underscored that the shortage of skilled teachers, inadequate finance
allocated to the education sector, and inadequate infrastructure pose significant challenges to
the successful implementation of the policy. According to a survey conducted by Maji and
Lohia (2023), respondents expressed concerns that the insufficiently trained staff to meet the
requirements of NEP 2020 could impact the effectiveness of the policy.

Smitha (2020) highlighted the oversight of prioritizing skill enhancement programs for
teachers within the policy. Observing the deficiency in teachers’ skill sets necessary for
implementing NEP 2020, Santmajor et al. (2022) recommended conducting workshops,
seminars, conferences, and enhancing teacher education curricula.
Serious apprehensions have been raised regarding the use of regional languages, referring to
it as a significant hurdle in effectively implementing the policy. Several authors have also
emphasized the need for addressing language barriers to ensure the policy’s successful
implementation. A study by Singh Kaurav et al. (2021) criticized NEP for the prominence
given to local languages, as it leads to a question of how the students will face the challenge
of learning at a later stage when most of the study material is available in English. A similar
view was put forward by K. Kumar et al. (2021) (Times of India report), where the author
noted a possible lack of confidence among the students taught in regional languages at school
while communicating with their peers who are taught in English. The author fears that this
might widen the gap between the sections in society.

There are also concerns regarding the repercussions of the privatization of education. Arun et
al. (2022), along with Smitha (2020), voiced apprehensions regarding the commercialization
and privatization of education under the new policy, emphasizing the potential risks
associated with private capital penetrating into the education sector. Menon (2020) raised
apprehension regarding “private philanthropy” suggested in the policy, which, according to
the author, is a kind of oxymoron as private investments in higher education will always be
linked to profits, which may not give equal access to all aspirants.

Batra (2020) also exhibited unease over the fact that privatization of elementary education
encouraged by NEP 2020 could make way for regularizing low-fee-paying schools with poor
infrastructure. Muralidharan et al. (2022) have expressed concerns regarding the lack of a
road map in the new policy to tackle the growing malady of capitation fees imposed by
private colleges, often managed by powerful politicians and religious groups.

Therefore, the concerns raised by several experts regarding NEP 2020 underscore the
complex challenges facing the education sector in India. From inadequate funding and
infrastructure to issues of regional language implementation and disparities in rural and urban
resources, the policy faces multifaceted obstacles that hinder its effective implementation.
Addressing these challenges will require comprehensive strategies that prioritize fundamental
infrastructure, equitable access, skilled teaching staff, and a clear vision that encompasses the
diverse realities of India’s educational landscape.

National Education Policy – Benefits

Prabu and Mookkiah (2021) underlined the significance of providing universal access to
quality education as pivotal to India’s progress and global leadership across various domains,
including economic development, social justice, scientific advancement, equality, national
integration, and cultural preservation. Similarly, D. Kumar (2020) commended NEP for its
forward-thinking approach in making the education system more flexible, multidisciplinary,
and aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The author emphasized that
NEP’s focus on pragmatic knowledge over rote learning fosters the development of scientific
acumen and values-based education among students.

Likewise, Patil (2021) underscored the importance of a well-defined and futuristic education
policy for a country’s economic and social advancement, praising NEP 2020 for its holistic
and multidisciplinary approach to education. Kalyani (2020) observed that NEP 2020 is
geared toward transforming the traditional education model into a globally competitive
system with increased flexibility. The policy’s emphasis on multidisciplinary education is
seen as a catalyst for enhancing students’ capabilities and preparing them for a dynamic
future.

In another study, Gupta and Choubey (2021) pointed out that the multi-entry and exit option
for students will create an understanding of allied streams and interests; however, the authors
pointed out that in professional streams such as engineering and allied areas, it is not a simple
task. Kannan (2021) appreciated NEP’s initiatives such as the Multidisciplinary Education
Research Universities (MERU) program, emphasis on research and innovation, and
integration of traditional Vedic education with modern educational practices as commendable
steps forward.

NEP 2020 is being praised for its emphasis on local language, vocational training, and
holistic development. Kaurav et al. (2021) emphasized that NEP’s focus on local languages
and flexibility in the education system through vocational and skill-oriented subjects would
not only reduce dropout rates but also enhance critical thinking and holistic development of
students. Furthermore, they highlighted the policy’s focus on nurturing students’ attitudes and
aptitudes, fostering industry readiness, and encouraging entrepreneurial skills among
students.

Saini et al. (2021) noted that NEP 2020 aims to enhance critical thinking, cognitive learning,
and skill-based learning for the betterment of the education system. In another study, Sunny
(2021) praised the inclusion of vocational skill training in schools from Class 6, noting its
potential to dignify the perception of labor. Additionally, Lata et al. (2022) observed that NEP
2020’s efforts in promoting an art-integrated approach would strengthen the connection
between education and culture, facilitating the preservation and nurturing of Indian cultural
values in the teaching-learning process.

NEP is lauded by several experts for promoting the integration of technology, innovative
evaluation systems, and student-centric reforms to achieve a transformative shift toward a
more dynamic and inclusive education system. Anita et al. (2020) highlighted NEP 2020’s
emphasis on integrating technology into teaching practices, which facilitates engaging and
attractive classroom experiences while fostering interdisciplinary learning by breaking down
rigid subject boundaries.

Verma and Kumar (2021) appreciated the policy for several positive aspects, including its
focus on assessing knowledge rather than rote memorization, leveraging artificial intelligence
for student progress evaluation, and reforms in board and semester examination formats.
Additionally, Wankhade (2021) noted NEP 2020’s transformation of higher education from
information-centric to innovation-centric, transitioning toward a student-centric approach that
aligns with 21st-century educational reforms.

The study further lauded the policy’s provisions for autonomy in education, administration,
examinations, and evaluations, as well as its emphasis on merit-based admissions, faculty
selection, and the establishment of Boards of Governors. Moreover, the author highlighted
the biennial accreditation process mandated by NEP 2020 as instrumental in driving
continuous improvement within the education sector.

Kurien and Chandramana (2020) emphasized the significant achievements made by NEP
2020, particularly its implementation of real-time evaluation systems and the establishment of
a consultative monitoring and review framework, which enable continual self-improvement
within the education system. They also acknowledged the policy’s recognition of the
necessity to cultivate professionals across diverse fields, spanning from agriculture to
artificial intelligence, thereby equipping aspiring students with essential skill sets. However,
the authors underscored the critical importance of effective and timely implementation to
ensure the policy’s success.

Anita et al. (2020) also drew attention to the internationalization of education achieved
through the establishment of foreign universities in India for promoting international research
funding, providing international teachers and learners, and facilitating the writing of research
papers with international co-authors. Furthermore, the authors also noted that the
establishment of the National Research Foundation will promote quality research in higher
education and encourage researchers.

Underscoring the commitment of NEP toward lifelong learning and societal development,
Gandhi (2022) reviewed the role of NEP 2020 in promoting adult literacy and lifelong
learning programs. The study pointed out that NEP 2020 will serve as a valuable source for
the effective implementation of adult education and lifelong learning programs through the
provision of appropriate infrastructures like special Adult Education Centres (AECs) and
Vocational Training Centres (VTCs), and the recruitment of well-trained, skilled, and highly
qualified teachers, as well as the sharing of infrastructure of educational institutes.
The praise garnered by NEP 2020 from various authors underscores its ambitious vision and
wide-ranging impact on India’s educational landscape. From fostering universal access to
quality education to promoting multidisciplinary learning and innovative teaching
methodologies, NEP 2020 has been commended for its holistic approach toward national
development goals.

Conclusion:

The study guide covered the primary stakeholders — the teachers and learners — to get a
glance at their hopes and fears regarding NEP 2020. The insights emerging from this study
guide are intended to aid the members in charting out time-bound action plans for
implementation of the policy, keeping in mind the resource constraints and the challenges
expressed by the experts mentioned in this guide. Further, the study has not delved into the
comparison of India’s policy with that of other countries. This leaves much ground for further
research on the subject.
Implementing NEP is a multi-stakeholder mammoth exercise which warrants coordination
among existing bodies as well as the proposed regulatory and monitoring institutions at the
state and central levels. While some of the prior research (D. Kumar, 2020) has criticized the
policy for being utopian in its scale and vision, it is best to plan a phased implementation that
can first prove effective action in the right direction to attract all actors to converge their
efforts.

The government, however, must certainly take note of the fact that for the policy to reach its
highest potential would demand greater investment in education. The emphasis on digitizing
processes for monitoring programs, learning assessments, and the classroom experience itself
would also need our policies on IT protection, data privacy, and child protection and welfare
against overuse and abuse of technology to be reviewed, debated over, and updated.

While there are voices captured in this study guide that express concerns over a
multidisciplinary curriculum that may leave the student devoid of any specialization, one has
to note the evolving job market dynamics that can insulate a generalist from drastic changes
vis-à-vis a specialist relying on a single skill set. The focus on quality research is certainly
welcomed by all stakeholders, as it will pave the way for cross-sectoral innovation.

The effects of enhanced exposure to cultural activities, extracurricular interests, sports, and
arts on cognitive abilities, academic success, happiness, health, and wellbeing of the student
can only be determined in the long run. The NEP thus presents a fertile ground for
researchers to study a national experiment in the making to determine effective policies in
education. The cross-utilization of existing infrastructure and facilities — for vocational
training or adult education — is certainly putting the resources to good use, given the paucity
of amenities.

The students particularly lauded the fact that the policy aims at leveling the opportunities
through bridge courses for disadvantaged students and financial assistance for the less
privileged.

There is still, however, a need to educate all students on the changes and the rationale behind
them so they can make informed decisions regarding their current as well as future academic
pursuits and their careers. Also, since teachers are the backbone of the education system, it is
essential to build their capacities to guide, mentor, counsel, and educate their students in this
regard.

Overall, the majority of the respondents found the policy to be more flexible, futuristic,
inclusive, and equitable.
This study guide makes significant contributions by elucidating the perceptions and
expectations of primary stakeholders regarding the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 in
India. We have identified key challenges and opportunities for policy implementation,
underscoring the importance of phased execution, investment in education, and capacity-
building for teachers. Moreover, the study sheds light on the need for coordination among
multiple stakeholders and the importance of informed decision-making in shaping the future
of education in India.