New Delhi, Apr 03: In many government schools across India, classes still take place in overcrowded rooms, sometimes under open skies conditions far removed from the “holistic and experiential learning” envisioned by the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. The contrast is stark. While the policy lays out an ambitious roadmap for transforming education, its success rests on a foundation that remains uneven and, in many places, fragile.
The problem is not one of intent. NEP 2020 rightly shifts the focus from rote learning to critical thinking, flexibility, and inclusion. But implementation is inseparable from infrastructure and that is where the gap between vision and reality becomes most visible.
Basic facilities remain a persistent challenge. According to UDISE+ data, a significant number of schools still lack functional electricity, internet access, or adequate sanitation. Overcrowded classrooms and multi-grade teaching are common, particularly in rural and underserved regions. These are not minor inconveniences; they shape how children experience schooling. The absence of separate, functional toilets for girls, for instance, continues to affect attendance and retention, especially at the secondary level. In such settings, the idea of joyful, activity-based learning remains aspirational.
The challenge deepens with the policy’s strong push towards digital education. NEP 2020 envisions technology as a key enabler from virtual labs to blended learning. Yet the digital divide, laid bare during the pandemic, persists. ASER reports have repeatedly highlighted limited access to devices and connectivity among students in government schools. Even where digital infrastructure exists, it is often outdated or poorly maintained, and teachers may lack adequate training to integrate technology into pedagogy. The result is a widening gap between policy expectations and classroom realities.
Funding constraints further complicate the picture. While NEP 2020 recommends raising public expenditure on education to 6% of GDP, actual spending remains below this target. This shortfall affects not just the creation of infrastructure but its maintenance. Buildings, equipment, and learning resources require sustained investment; without it, even existing facilities deteriorate. The burden of reform, then, falls on systems already stretched thin.
Infrastructure, however, is not only about buildings and technology it is also about people. Teacher shortages remain a pressing issue, and many educators juggle multi-grade classrooms alongside administrative duties. The policy’s emphasis on competency-based and experiential learning assumes a level of preparedness that current training systems do not always support. Without continuous professional development and institutional backing, the shift from traditional methods to interactive learning remains difficult to realise.
Early childhood education, a cornerstone of NEP 2020, reveals similar gaps. The integration of Anganwadi centres into the formal education framework is a significant step, but many centres lack adequate facilities, learning materials, and trained personnel. When the foundation is weak, achieving goals such as universal foundational literacy and numeracy becomes far more challenging.
What ties these issues together is inequality. Infrastructure gaps are not evenly distributed; they are most pronounced in rural areas, tribal regions, and among economically weaker communities. While better-resourced schools often in the private sector are able to adopt new pedagogies and technologies, many government schools struggle to meet basic standards. The risk is clear: instead of bridging divides, reforms may inadvertently reinforce them.
These challenges also point to questions of governance. With education as a concurrent subject, both the Centre and States share responsibility, often leading to uneven implementation. Variations in administrative capacity, funding priorities, and monitoring mechanisms produce uneven outcomes across regions. Without stronger coordination and accountability, even well-designed policies risk losing momentum on the ground.
Addressing these gaps cannot be treated as a secondary concern. Infrastructure is central to the success of NEP 2020. Increasing public investment is necessary, but so is ensuring that funds are effectively utilised and directed to the schools that need them most. Strengthening basic facilities must go hand in hand with expanding digital access, while sustained teacher support and community engagement can help bridge local gaps.
NEP 2020 sets the right direction. But without addressing the conditions in which learning actually takes place, its promise will remain out of reach. Unless foundational gaps are urgently addressed, the policy risks becoming not a transformative reform, but an aspirational document disconnected from the classrooms it seeks to change.
(Vaishali Sharma is a Master’s student in History at the University of Delhi, passionate about inclusive and holistic education. Her research interests include education, public policy, and international relations, with published works on curriculum. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author).
