July 29, 2025 marks the fifth anniversary of the release of the National Education Policy (NEP) and just over three months after the passing of Dr K. Kasturirangan – “Dr Rangan” to most of us. I had the privilege of working closely with him during the last decade of his life which he spent completely immersed in the world of education, covering everything from school education to higher education, including teacher education and adult education, first through preparing the Karnataka State Education policy in 2015-16 and then the NEP from 2017 onwards. 

Dr Rangan understood, and was very excited by, the scale of the impact that the NEP could potentially make, so he was very keen that we bring out an excellent policy. So how does one ensure that this happens, particularly in a field that is vast and relatively unfamiliar? Dr Rangan showed us the way by consulting widely and ensuring that the policy-making process was inclusive, so that the final policy, when it was ready, would also have broad acceptance. Many people wrote to him asking to be allowed to meet him and provide inputs and Dr Rangan decided to meet everyone, so in the end we met well over 200 individuals/ groups. He also didn’t hesitate to proactively consult many experts.

One key characteristic I noticed during all these consultations was that he was always listening for the dissenting voice that could alert him to the need for more nuance in the policy. At meetings he always invited the younger people and those who had not spoken to also voice their opinions. When he learnt something completely new, for example about how brain development happens in young children, from Dr Vinita Kaul, he would spend many hours reading around it. It is his emphasis on incorporating all the latest research about how children learn that led to many key aspects of the policy, such as (i) the emphasis on early childhood care and education (ECCE) and foundational literacy and numeracy (FLN); (ii) the recommendation to teach children how to speak two-three languages (read and write only 1) before the age of 10; and (iii) and the effort to bring education closer to the interests and aspirations of every child; among others. 

People have referred to him as the consummate consensus builder, which he was. He guided the committee members and all of us through the decision-making process ever so gently, nudging us to find consensus on most recommendations in the policy. Without explicitly saying so, Dr Rangan also laid out a framework for all of us to work with including guidelines, such as:

i)    ensuring that the NEP is aligned with India’s overall development goals of becoming a knowledge economy

ii)    ensuring that inputs from the latest research on how children learn, or how technology can be used beneficially, comes into the policy

iii)    ensuring that the policy does not interfere with the role of state governments 

iv)    keeping the focus on strengthening government schools and colleges so as to be able to reach the most disadvantaged students; and 

v)    investing in teachers and restoring autonomy to them and to the managements of schools and higher education institutions; among others. 

Dr Rangan was very conscious of the fact that the final decision on just about every aspect of the policy was his, so unlike the rest of us who picked a few specific topics each to research and write about, he had to put in many additional hours to stay on top of every single topic, something he did very cheerfully, so devoted he was to the cause. He read a large number of books and reports, everything from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the UNGA in 1948 to all the influential reports on education and books written by the presidents of various universities in the US, not to mention reading every word of every edition of the draft NEP that the drafting committee produced. 

Dr Rangan referred to his work on the NEP as the ‘mother of all responsibilities’, transcending everything he had done before, and we could see that it really was. He worked very hard and made everything look effortless when it was not – not by a long shot. When the NEP 2020 became public, the strain on him went up several notches. He had to appear on multiple TV channels and get grilled on different aspects of the policy. The DNEP is 464 pages, and it needed a lot of effort on his part to know every detail and defend all of it. He also gave well over a hundred talks and convocation addresses on the policy, going to great lengths to ensure that his speeches were not repetitive. 

National Education Commission
There were two key recommendations in the policy that were uniquely shaped by Dr Rangan himself. One was the recommendation to set up the National Education Commission (NEC), which in his words, “was a ‘unique’ reform that would bring in a new approach to governance that will draw considerable expertise through educationists, researchers and professionals, and provide oversight of the educational system that is consistent with the objectives of a 21st century education system. This highest body is being placed under the responsibility of the Prime Minister himself/herself so that in his/ her role as the highest functionary of the government of the country, the Prime Minister can bring his/her authority to create the necessary synergies and provide direction to this national endeavour, as a part of the country’s overall vision of a knowledge society”. 

Had the NEC headed by the PM become a reality, it would have:
i)    ensured that the policy was implemented in the spirit in which it was intended, over the period of 20 years that it was meant to be relevant for

ii)    made the policy implementation responsive to a fast-changing world

iii)    achieved better and deeper cooperation with the States, with a strengthened and rejuvenated Central Advisory Board on Education (CABE)

iv)    provided continuity across changes in governments and leadership within ministries, at the Centre and in the states

v)    helped to mobilise the considerable additional investment that is needed

vi)    served as a sounding board and provided guidance and course correction as educational institutions took up the task of implementing the policy.

Unfortunately, this important reform did not even make it out of the Draft NEP 2019 into the government’s NEP 2020.

The National Research Foundation
The NEP was to have a chapter on promoting research in universities and colleges given that less than 10% of the research in India was coming from universities relative to 50-60% in many countries. 

Dr Rangan was recovering from an illness in late February 2018, so we went to his house to get his inputs, and it was remarkable how in just a few minutes he outlined his vision for the National Research Foundation (NRF): 

•    the NRF would primarily be an instrument for building research capacity in universities, colleges and even schools, to help wipe out the deficit caused by the separation of research and teaching institutions, after Independence 

•    it would cover research in all disciplines – sciences, social sciences, humanities and the Arts

•    it would be an independent, autonomous, institution run and managed by researchers, in the model of the US NSF which has become the gold standard in the world today 

•    the Ministry of Education would be the line ministry that would support the NRF, since it had the necessary connections with all educational institutions 

•    the instruments for building research capacity would be retired professors from research institutions around the country, who would be encouraged to engage with one or more educational institution of their choice and prepare a research plan for the institution that would then be funded by the NRF 

•    all existing science ministries would continue. They would be encouraged to contribute up to 2% of their budgets to the NRF and participate in the capacity building efforts 

•    some of non-strategic research being done by strategic ministries such as those of Space, Atomic Energy, and Defence could be hived off to the NRF to help build connections between these organisations and academic institutions

•    PSUs, industry, and businesses, would be encouraged to participate in the NRF. 

Dr Rangan was no stranger to government work, having served as Secretary, Department of Space and in several other roles. He had chosen the Ministry of Education as the line ministry to serve the NRF. Unfortunately, the Ministry declined to accept the responsibility of supporting the NRF, saying that they did not have the capacity to do so and Dr Rangan’s vision began to unravel very quickly. The ANRF that is now functioning is essentially yet another vehicle for funding research in the sciences, and a replacement for the SERB, which was not what had been envisaged by Dr Rangan. What has been lost is the sharp focus on capacity building that the NRF had, something that is critically needed given that India had a paltry 153 researchers per million population in 2016-17, relative to China (1110), US (4230) and Israel (8250).

During his last two years or so, Dr Rangan was keenly aware that the implementation of the policy was not proceeding as well as it should, and that its immense potential was slipping away. Several functionaries whom he trusted and mentored could not get key reforms through, and he accepted it because by then he had a very keen sense of which battles he could win. I would often bother him asking him why he wasn’t pushing harder, but he had stopped fighting. His health problems were resurfacing, and he was getting increasingly frail. The only thing he would say was “we have done our best, now it is up to other people to take it forward”. He had handed the baton over.

It is very sad that there does not appear to be anyone who is in a position to pick up the baton and carry his work forward. As often happens with mishaps in education policies and their implementation it is the students who will pay the price and not receive the opportunities they deserve. 

Leena Chandran Wadia was a Member of the Drafting Committee, Draft NEP 2019.