Education Reforms and Challenges under Provincial Autonomy

When the Government of India Act of 1935 came into force in 1937, it fundamentally changed who was responsible for education in India. For the first time, elected Indian ministers – not British officials – had real authority over educational policy in their provinces. This decade-long phase, spanning from 1936-37 to 1946-47, is known as the period of Provincial Autonomy. It was a brief but consequential window in which Indian leaders tried to shape an educational system that had long served colonial, not Indian, interests. The reforms they pursued, the philosophies they championed, and the obstacles they faced all tell a deeply instructive story about education, power, and identity in late colonial India.

The Government of India Act 1935: a turning point for education
Congress ministries and educational initiative (1937-1939)
The Wardha Scheme of Basic Education (Nai Talim)
Limitations of the Wardha Scheme
World War II and the disruption of education (1939-1944)
The Sargent Plan: a blueprint for post-war educational reconstruction (1944)
Key recommendations of the Sargent Plan
Criticism of the Sargent Plan
Persistent challenges: funding, infrastructure, and equity
Legacy of the provincial autonomy period

The Government of India Act 1935: a turning point for education

Before 1935, education in India had operated under a system called Dyarchy, introduced by the Government of India Act of 1919. Under Dyarchy, education was a “transferred” subject under Indian ministers, but those ministers were financially starved and administratively constrained. The Act of 1935 replaced Dyarchy entirely. It abolished the division of Reserved and Transferred subjects, handing over education, health, agriculture, and local governance to fully elected provincial governments accountable to their legislatures.

The Act granted provincial autonomy with elected legislatures now able to form majorities and shape government policy. Education was placed squarely on the Provincial List – meaning provinces could legislate, budget, and administer their own educational systems without central interference. Provincial governments could now make decisions on education, health, agriculture, and local governance without interference from the centre. This was unprecedented.

Provincial autonomy came into effect in April 1937, following elections held under the new Act. The Indian National Congress won majorities in seven out of eleven provinces, and the newly empowered Congress ministries immediately turned their attention to reshaping education. However, one critical limitation remained: the British-appointed governors retained discretionary powers, including the authority to dismiss ministries, veto legislation, and override decisions in areas they deemed sensitive. Despite provincial autonomy, critical areas like defence, foreign affairs, and currency remained under the direct control of the British Government through the Viceroy and Governors. So while the door to educational reform had opened, it was not fully unlocked.

Congress ministries and educational initiative (1937-1939)

The two years between 1937 and 1939 – before the Congress ministries resigned in protest over India being dragged into World War II – were perhaps the most energetic period of the entire phase. The education ministers under provincial autonomy could command far larger resources than the ministers under Dyarchy ever did. They expanded primary schools, promoted mother-tongue instruction, and began investing in teacher training. Detailed plans for the expansion of elementary education were developed across several provinces.

It was during this window that Mahatma Gandhi proposed a radically different vision of education – one rooted in Indian culture, self-reliance, and the dignity of labour.

The Wardha Scheme of Basic Education (Nai Talim)

In August 1937, Gandhi wrote in his newspaper Harijan urging provincial governments to take responsibility for educating children between the ages of 7 and 14. By October 1937, an all-India National Educational Conference was held at Wardha where the conference resolved to accept Gandhi’s proposal that free and compulsory education be provided for seven years through the mother tongue on a nationwide scale, with the educational process centred around some form of manual and productive work.

Gandhi’s argument was pragmatic as much as philosophical. Mass education required enormous funding, and the colonial government had never allocated enough. His solution: make schooling financially self-sustaining by having students learn through a productive craft – weaving, carpentry, agriculture, pottery. The income from the craft would cover teacher salaries. The conference decided to accept the proposal for free, mandatory education delivered through the mother tongue for seven years on a national level, with the educational process centred around some form of manual and productive work. Following that, two model schools were inaugurated in Segaon and adjacent Wardha.

To translate the conference’s resolutions into a workable plan, a committee was formed under the chairmanship of Dr. Zakir Hussain, then Vice Chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia University. The Wardha Scheme of Basic Education, also known as Nai Talim or “New Education,” focused on integrating productive manual work with learning, moral development, and practical knowledge – aiming to connect education directly with life and develop skilled, socially responsible citizens.

The scheme also carried a strong nationalist tone. Congress ministries in the seven provinces took measures to implement the scheme, though it faced opposition from the All-India Muslim League, which criticized it on communal grounds. Despite political friction, the Wardha Scheme marked the first time in India’s colonial history that a nationally coherent, indigenously conceived educational philosophy was officially advanced by elected governments.

Limitations of the Wardha Scheme

The scheme faced serious structural problems. Converting existing schools to the new system required substantial retraining of teachers, most of whom were accustomed to conventional classroom instruction. The craft-centered approach demanded specialized skills and a willingness to engage in manual work, which some teachers resisted. There were also social barriers: in communities where caste hierarchies traditionally valued intellectual over manual labour, parents objected to their children engaging in craft work at school. And then, just as the scheme was gaining momentum, the Congress ministries resigned in 1939 following the outbreak of World War II – effectively halting implementation.

World War II and the disruption of education (1939-1944)

The resignation of Congress provincial governments in September 1939 created an administrative vacuum. Governors assumed direct rule in most provinces, and educational priorities were subordinated to war needs. Funding that might have gone to schools was redirected toward the war effort. Although detailed plans for comprehensive expansion of elementary education had been developed, implementation was restricted because of World War II.

The war also exposed India’s deep literacy crisis in a harsh light. The 1943 Bengal Famine, which killed an estimated 2-3 million people, highlighted how pervasive illiteracy – standing at over 90% among adults – impeded effective communication, planning, and relief measures, revealing how low educational attainment constrained India’s ability to respond to crises. This catastrophe made it impossible for the colonial government to ignore the education problem any longer.

The Sargent Plan: a blueprint for post-war educational reconstruction (1944)

As Allied victory in World War II appeared increasingly likely, the British Indian government directed its attention toward post-war reconstruction – including education. In the mid-1940s, the Government of India realised it could no longer be indifferent to the problem of education and that there was a need for radical reform across all aspects of Indian education. Sir John Sargent, the Educational Advisor to the Government of India, was tasked with preparing a comprehensive educational scheme. The resulting document – formally titled Report on Post-War Educational Development in India – was presented to the Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE) in 1944.

Key recommendations of the Sargent Plan

The Sargent Plan was historic in scope. It was the first plan of the British period which covered all levels of education – from pre-primary through university and technical education – and was the first to suggest providing education to mentally and physically handicapped children. Its key proposals included:

Pre-primary education: Nursery schools for children between 3 and 6 years, provided free on a voluntary basis.
Universal basic education: Free and compulsory education for all children aged 6 to 11, with a goal of universal literacy within 40 years.
Dual school structure: Junior Basic Schools (ages 6-11) and Senior Basic Schools (ages 11-14), broadly aligned with the Wardha Scheme’s framework.
High schools: Two tracks – academic and technical/vocational – with intermediate courses abolished to streamline the path to higher education.
University reform: Raising standards and allowing only capable students into university education, along with setting up a University Grants Committee modelled on England’s system.
Teacher training and pay: Proper teacher preparation recognised as a professional priority, with improved pay scales and working conditions.
Inclusion: The Sargent Report asserted that inclusion was the only means of delivering education, recommending that students with disabilities be fully mainstreamed.
Mother tongue instruction: Use of the mother tongue as the medium of instruction in schools, with English as a secondary language.

The report had a clear-cut objective of achieving educational development in forty years comparable to the level of educational development prevailing in Britain at the time. It was the first document in colonial India to present a truly comprehensive, national-level picture of education at every stage.

Criticism of the Sargent Plan

Despite its ambition, the plan drew sharp criticism from multiple directions. Indian nationalists were dismissive of the 40-year timeline. The 40-year time-frame was derided by leaders of the Indian independence movement as being too long a period to achieve universal literacy. The irony, of course, is that India’s literacy rate had only reached around 65% by 2008 – 64 years after the plan was proposed – underscoring just how persistent the challenge was.

The plan also faced criticism for its financial scale. Contemporary critiques highlighted the scheme’s ambitious financial assumptions, arguing that a resource-poor nation like India could not shoulder the enormous costs of universal education amid competing post-war reconstruction needs, and that the absence of a phased fiscal strategy made the plan impracticable on budgetary grounds. Estimates placed implementation costs at over Rs. 1,000 crores – an astronomical figure for the Indian economy of 1944.

Additionally, the plan was seen as western-centric in orientation, largely following English educational models and neglecting indigenous knowledge systems, languages, and cultural traditions. Its emphasis on rapid quantitative expansion also risked compromising quality, as there were simply not enough trained teachers available to implement it at scale.

Persistent challenges: funding, infrastructure, and equity

Across the entire period of provincial autonomy, three structural problems consistently undermined educational progress: money, infrastructure, and social inequality.

Funding gaps were chronic. Even with greater provincial control, education budgets remained thin. The war years made things significantly worse, as resources were diverted and development plans shelved. Infrastructure – school buildings, trained teachers, textbooks – was inadequate, especially in rural areas. Many schools functioned in makeshift conditions, and large tracts of India, particularly in rural and tribal regions, had little or no access to formal schooling at all.

Perhaps most troubling were the equity gaps. By 1947, only about 35% of school-age children were enrolled in primary schools, with significant regional and gender disparities persisting. Women’s education improved marginally – female literacy rose from approximately 3% in 1937 to roughly 7% by 1947 – but the improvement was far too slow, reflecting the deep social barriers that neither government policy nor administrative reform alone could quickly overcome.

Primary education remained far from universal by the end of the period. As of 1946-47, compulsory primary education had not been introduced in Assam, the North West Frontier Province, and Centrally Administered Areas (except Delhi), illustrating the uneven reach of educational reform even at the close of the colonial era.

Legacy of the provincial autonomy period

Despite its limitations, the period from 1936-37 to 1946-47 left a significant imprint on Indian education. It established the principle that education was a matter of national importance requiring Indian – not imperial – leadership. The Wardha Scheme planted the seeds of a distinctly Indian educational philosophy, elements of which can be traced through Article 45 of the Directive Principles of State Policy in the Indian Constitution and later through the Right to Education Act (2009) under Article 21A. The Sargent Plan, for its part, became a structural reference point for post-independence educational planning. Most states structured their school-level education systems on the basis of the Sargent Plan after independence.

What this period ultimately shows is that educational reform cannot be separated from political power, financial resources, and social will. Indian leaders had ideas – some visionary, some pragmatic, some contested – but they were working within a colonial framework that imposed hard limits. The real test of those ideas would come after 1947, when an independent India inherited both the promise and the unfinished business of this decade of reform.

What do you think? Given that both the Wardha Scheme and the Sargent Plan proposed free and compulsory basic education, yet India still struggled with universal literacy decades after independence – what do you think were the deeper barriers that policy alone could not address? And looking at the tension between Gandhi’s craft-centred Nai Talim and the Sargent Plan’s more conventional academic structure, which approach do you think was better suited to India’s educational needs in the mid-twentieth century?

References

PDF 📄

Table of Contents

The Government of India Act 1935: a turning point for education 🔗

Congress ministries and educational initiative (1937-1939) 🔗

The Wardha Scheme of Basic Education (Nai Talim) 🔗

Limitations of the Wardha Scheme 🔗

World War II and the disruption of education (1939-1944) 🔗

The Sargent Plan: a blueprint for post-war educational reconstruction (1944) 🔗

Key recommendations of the Sargent Plan 🔗

Criticism of the Sargent Plan 🔗

Persistent challenges: funding, infrastructure, and equity 🔗

Legacy of the provincial autonomy period 🔗