I am left with so much uncertainty and confusion about my academic as well as career path. Even teachers are unaware and uninformed about the structure and the entry-exit system provided by NEP.
By Gursimran Kaur
The National Education Policy (NEP) and central universities entrance test (CUET) were introduced by the ministry of education with the aim to transform the Indian education system. Many universities adopted the CUET system wholly, while some only partially.
Delhi University became the first central university to adopt NEP and the four-year undergraduate curriculum prescribed in the policy.
Despite being implemented a a while now, these education reforms still remain a mystery for many students. Many students and educational institutions are grappling with the challenges of understanding and implementing the New Education Policy.
Uncertain Academic Paths
One of the biggest problem the NEP poses to students is the push toward a four-year graduation model for honours courses. Not every student wants to spend four years completing their undergraduate degree, especially those who do not plan to pursue research or a Ph.D. But under the current structure, students must complete the fourth year in order to receive an honours degree. This makes the extra year feel like an unnecessary burden for many students.
The Ministry of Education itself appears to struggle. Initially, the NEP proposed that students exiting after the third year would receive an honours degree. However, this was later changed, leaving students further uncertain about their academic paths. This lack of stability makes it difficult for students to plan their academic careers, causing unnecessary stress and confusion.
Even among students, there is little or no clarity on some of its core concepts, like the multiple entry-exit system, the credit system, and the Academic Bank of Credits (ABC) ID. Ask any student about these features, and chances are, they won’t have a clear understanding of how these systems actually work.
Moreover, the NEP mandates that students need a minimum of a 7.5 CGPA to enrol in the fourth-year research component. If a student falls short of this requirement, they will be forced to exit the program without the research experience. However, if they want an honours degree, they still need to complete the fourth year, creating a frustrating paradox. For students who aren’t interested in research or academia, this extra year feels like a waste of time, especially when the students could be focusing on other things or career goals.
My own experience
CUET was brought in to create an easy and standardised process of admission. But it came with its own set of problems. The idea that students can only take the entrance test in subjects they studied in class 12 is flawed. For instance, if a student studied commerce in high school but wishes to switch to history for graduation, they are tested based on their commerce knowledge. This severely limits a student’s ability to explore different academic fields, especially when many are still undecided about their true interests at the time of college admissions.
Take my own experience as an example. I want to pursue journalism, and when I took admission through CUET, I was told that I would get an honours degree in three years and an honours with research in the span of four years. But later this was changed, and now I am left with so much uncertainty and confusion about my academic as well as career path. Even teachers are unaware and uninformed about the structure and the entry-exit system provided by NEP.
Part of an Experiment?
From my point of view, these things should have been optional and more flexible. I feel like I’m a part of some experiment that is being done by the Ministry of Education.
Both NEP and CUET were introduced with the intention of improving India’s education system, but they have ended up creating more confusion and stress for students.
Not every student wants to go into research or academia. Many just want a basic undergraduate degree so they can focus on their careers.
NEP needs to be clearer and more flexible, especially in terms of its four-year graduation requirement. Each student should not have to spend extra time in college for research.
The rigid structures imposed by NEP and CUET may work for some but are a hindrance for many others.
At the end of the day, what students and teachers need is a clarity – that is elusive.
