Understanding the Policy Formulation Process in Indian Education

Every classroom in India – from a rural primary school in Bihar to a university campus in Bengaluru – is shaped by decisions made at the policy level, often years or even decades before. But how do those decisions actually get made? India’s education policy formulation is not a simple top-down process. It is a layered, multi-stakeholder journey that moves from commission-based research through national policy drafting, public consultation, and finally legislative enactment. Understanding this process helps explain why Indian education reforms take the shape they do – and why some take so long to reach the ground.

The role of commissions in shaping education policy 🔗

Post-independence India inherited a fragmented, colonial-era education system that urgently needed a coherent national direction. The government’s response was to appoint specialized commissions – expert bodies tasked with reviewing the system and recommending reforms. The Union government established a series of commissions, beginning with the University Education Commission (1948-49) and the Secondary Education Commission (1952-53), before arriving at what became the most consequential of all: the Kothari Commission.

The Kothari Commission (1964-66): the turning point 🔗

The National Education Commission (1964-66), popularly known as the Kothari Commission, was formed on 14 July 1964 under the chairmanship of Dr. Daulat Singh Kothari, then chairman of the University Grants Commission. It was the first commission in independent India with a comprehensive mandate covering all levels of education – from primary schooling to higher education – excluding only medical and legal studies.

The scale of the commission’s work was significant. Over a span of 21 months, it interviewed 9,000 individuals – scholars, educators, and scientists – and examined 2,400 memorandums. It also drew on a panel of 20 overseas consultants from countries including the USA, UK, Japan, France, and Sweden. The final 287-page report was submitted on 29 June 1966 to the then Minister of Education, M. C. Chagla.

The commission’s recommendations were wide-ranging. It proposed restructuring education into a uniform 10+2+3 pattern, free and compulsory education for children aged 6 to 14, a three-language formula for secondary schools, stronger teacher training and pay conditions, and a significant increase in the education budget. Most importantly, it called for the formulation of a National Policy on Education – a single, cohesive document to guide India’s educational development.

The Kothari Commission was not alone. Other commissions followed, each addressing specific concerns. The National Commission on Teachers (1983), for instance, focused specifically on the status and professional development of teachers, adding another layer to the cumulative policy framework being built over the decades. These commissions collectively formed the research and evidence base upon which national education policies were constructed.

From commission reports to national education policies 🔗

Commission reports do not automatically become policy. They feed into a deliberative government process that results in a formal National Policy on Education (NPE) – a document that sets the country’s educational priorities, goals, and reform agenda for the years ahead. India has seen four major national education policies since independence: 1968, 1986 (revised in 1992), and NEP 2020.

National Policy on Education, 1968 🔗

Based on the Kothari Commission’s recommendations, the government under Prime Minister Indira Gandhi announced the first National Policy on Education in 1968, calling for a “radical restructuring” of the system. The fourth Lok Sabha passed the bill, covering recommendations such as free and compulsory education, revision of teacher pay scales, equalization of educational opportunity, and a push for science education.

The 1968 NPE was a landmark – the first time India had a unified national framework for education. It proposed the mother tongue as the medium of instruction at the primary level, called for education spending to rise to six percent of national income, and laid out a 17-point action agenda. While it set a strong directional precedent, implementation fell short in several areas, particularly in funding and teacher reforms, largely because education remained a State subject at the time.

National Policy on Education, 1986 🔗

In 1986, the government led by Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi introduced a new National Policy on Education, which was later modified in 1992 under P. V. Narasimha Rao. This policy represented a significant shift – it explicitly addressed inequalities across gender, caste, and region, and called for special emphasis on equalising educational opportunity for women, Scheduled Castes, and Scheduled Tribes.

The 1986 policy also launched Operation Blackboard to improve primary schools nationwide and expanded the open university system, leading to the growth of the Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU). It introduced the concept of the “rural university” model and gave attention to curriculum reform. Importantly, it accepted the Kothari Commission’s recommendation on the Common School System, aiming to bring all children within a neighbourhood school framework – though in practice, this goal remained elusive.

While the 1986 policy emphasized achieving uniformity and standardisation of education across social groups, it did not adequately account for the global economic context that emerged after India’s 1991 liberalisation, making another round of reform inevitable.

Community and stakeholder involvement in policy refinement 🔗

One of the defining features of India’s policy formulation process – particularly in recent decades – is that it is not confined to government offices or commission boardrooms. Education policy is a concurrent subject under the Indian Constitution, meaning both the central government and state governments share responsibility for it. This federal structure necessitates wide consultation before any policy is finalised.

The Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE), formed in 1920, is the apex advisory body that brings together various stakeholders to guide educational reforms. It provides a platform where state governments, educational experts, parliamentarians, and civil society representatives deliberate together. During the formulation of both the 1968 and 1986 National Education Policies, CABE played a significant role in ensuring that central and state governments were aligned in their educational priorities.

Beyond CABE, the consultation process for major policies extends outward to the public. The drafting of NEP 2020 is the clearest modern example of this. The Ministry undertook a rigorous consultation process: over two lakh suggestions from 2.5 lakh gram panchayats, 6,600 blocks, 6,000 Urban Local Bodies, and 676 districts were received. This made it one of the most extensively consulted policy documents in Indian history.

The process began as early as 2015. The formulation of NEP 2020 was initiated by the Ministry of Human Resource Development in January 2015 through a committee chaired by former Cabinet Secretary T. S. R. Subramanian, which engaged in widespread consultations with state governments, educators, and experts. A subsequent Drafting Committee chaired by Dr. Krishnaswamy Kasturirangan then refined the draft further, incorporating feedback from the public consultation phase.

These consultations are designed to gather insights from communities that formal policy machinery might otherwise overlook – rural populations, linguistic minorities, persons with disabilities, and marginalised groups. Stakeholders including students, teachers, and the public are engaged so that policymakers can understand the ground reality of the education system before committing to reform. Think tanks, NGOs, and academic institutions also contribute research and alternative perspectives that supplement what government officials observe from within the system.

That said, the quality of consultation varies. Critics have noted that for NEP 2020’s curriculum framework process, some consultations were conducted through digital surveys with pre-set response categories, which limited the depth of public input. The effectiveness of stakeholder engagement ultimately depends on whether responses genuinely inform the final policy – or merely serve as procedural validation for decisions already made.

Legislative approval and implementation through government resolutions 🔗

Once a draft policy has been developed and refined through consultation, it enters the formal approval stage. In India, education policies are not ordinarily enacted through standalone Acts of Parliament – instead, they are approved by the Union Cabinet and then implemented through government resolutions, notifications, and centrally sponsored schemes.

The 1968 NPE was passed by the Lok Sabha. NEP 2020 was approved by the Union Cabinet of India on 29 July 2020, signalling the government’s formal commitment to the reform agenda. However, as analysts have pointed out, cabinet approval is not the same as implementation. The policy itself states that its rollout requires “multiple initiatives and actions, which will have to be taken by multiple bodies in a synchronised way.”

This is where implementation becomes complex. Because education is a concurrent subject, individual state governments must also enact their own legislative changes and administrative orders to bring national policies to life. A centrally approved policy framework must be translated into state-level curriculum revisions, school infrastructure investments, teacher training programmes, and new institutional bodies. The NEP requires multiple legislative amendments by the central and state governments, creation of various bodies, and development of new teaching methods and curricula.

The Central Advisory Board of Education plays a continued role even post-approval, monitoring implementation, reviewing progress, and advising on course corrections. Regulatory bodies like the University Grants Commission (UGC), the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), and NITI Aayog (which replaced the Planning Commission in 2015) also contribute to translating policy into operational reality – from revised curriculum frameworks and textbooks to new teacher qualification norms.

The Right to Education Act (2009) is a useful example of how policy intent eventually crystallises into law. What began as a constitutional directive under Article 45 and was reinforced by the 1968 NPE’s call for free and compulsory education became, over four decades later, a justiciable right under Article 21-A of the Constitution, backed by enforceable legislation. This shows how the policy formulation cycle is genuinely long – commissions plant seeds, national policies set direction, and legislation eventually makes rights real.

The policy formulation cycle: a continuous process 🔗

India’s education policy formulation is best understood not as a linear sequence of steps, but as an ongoing cycle. Each policy generates new data, exposes new gaps, and prompts further review. The Kothari Commission’s recommendations shaped the 1968 NPE; the 1968 NPE’s shortcomings prompted the 1986 revision; the 1986 policy’s limitations in a globalised economy made NEP 2020 necessary. At each stage, commissions, consultations, legislative bodies, and implementation agencies feed into and learn from one another.

What makes this process both robust and slow is its democratic character. India is a large, linguistically diverse, federal democracy where education touches every family and community. Getting that process right – balancing national goals with local realities, expert knowledge with public voice, central direction with state autonomy – is genuinely difficult. The policies that emerge from this process carry the weight of those negotiations, which is both their strength and the source of the compromises embedded within them.

What do you think? Given that education is a concurrent subject shared between central and state governments, how can India ensure more consistent and timely implementation of national education policies across all states? And as public consultations move increasingly online, do you think digital formats truly capture the voices of rural and marginalised communities who stand to benefit most from education reforms?

References

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Policy_on_Education
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kothari_Commission
3. https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/kothari-commission/
4. https://www.jetir.org/papers/JETIR2309546.pdf
5. https://journal.iujharkhand.edu.in/Dec-2020/The-Significant-Shift.html
6. https://distancelearning.institute/management/education-policies-diverse-india/
7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Education_Policy_2020
8. https://grokipedia.com/page/National_Education_Policy_2020
9. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440241279367
10. https://swarajyamag.com/ideas/cabinet-approval-of-policy-different-from-educational-reform-on-ground-that-road-is-a-long-one
11. https://educationforallinindia.com/understanding-cabe-a-comprehensive-exploration-of-indias-central-advisory-board-of-education/
12. https://righttoeducation.in/know-your-rte/about