NEP 2020: Will teacher education reforms miss the bus?

Teacher education is fundamental to building a pool of quality school teachers who will shape the next generation. As the National Education Policy (NEP), 2020 recognises, teacher preparation requires multidisciplinary knowledge, appropriate values and dispositions, and professional practice under the guidance of good mentors. With over 15,000 Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) with annual intake capacity of more than 17 lakh potential teachers, reforms in this sector are critical to improving the quality of education. NEP 2020 makes two important recommendations. First, substandard and dysfunctional TEIs must be identified and given a one-year opportunity to remedy their deficiencies, failing which they should be closed down, so that by 2030 only the educationally sound, multi-disciplinary institutions offering integrated teacher education programmes remain operational. Second, all standalone TEIs must transform into multidisciplinary institutions by 2030 and offer the four-year Integrated Teacher Education Programme (ITEP). How far have we progressed since 2020 and are we prepared to meet these objectives by 2030?

Also read | Tax-wise, $-foolish: Saving Dalal Street could come at a cost to Startup Street

Identifying and addressing substandard TEIs

The National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), the statutory regulator for teacher preparation, needs to put in place a comprehensive mechanism to identify and address dysfunctional institutions. In 2019, NCTE introduced mandatory Performance Appraisal Reports (PARs) for TEIs. However, the existing framework largely captures input-related information, such as faculty strength, infrastructure, programmes and organisational/institutional details. It does not capture institutional performance, including teaching-learning processes, curriculum transaction, qualitymanagement and student outcomes. Similarly, inspections by NCTE focus predominantly on input parameters, which do not necessarily establish the quality of teacher preparation. NCTE must move beyond input-based compliance towards a comprehensive assessment incorporating input, process and outcome indicators. It could draw upon NAAC’s ‘Institutional Accreditation: Manual for Self-Study Report for Teacher Education Institutions’ (2019) to revise its assessment framework and establish appropriate quality benchmarks. Based on such an assessment, institutions could be classified into clearly defined categories. Those meeting the prescribed standards may be allowed to continue with recommendations for improvement. Institutions falling short should be given a one-year remedial period, followed by a fresh assessment to determine whether they merit continuation or their recognition should be withdrawn. Assessing over 15,000 institutions within a limited timeframe is a formidable task. NCTE could address the challenge by coordinating with UGC and drawing upon universities, colleges, SCERTs, DIETs, domain specialists and retired education professionals. A time-bound national inspection programme, supported by transparent criteria and standardised procedures, is essential. Without initiating this exercise immediately, the objective of eliminating substandard TEIs by 2030 may remain aspirational.


Also read | With G-sec yields rising, countries have no alternative but to increase their bullion holdings

Transforming standalone TEIs into multidisciplinary institutions

The second major challenge is the transformation of standalone TEIs into multidisciplinary institutions by 2030. While the primary responsibility rests with institutional managements, NCTE must play a proactive enabling role. So far, NCTE’s efforts have largely focused on granting recognition to institutions seeking to offer ITEP, with around 400 institutions reportedly receiving recognition. The larger challenge, however, is facilitating the transformation of thousands of existing standalone TEIs, particularly those found academically and institutionally viable. UGC issued guidelines in 2022 for transforming colleges into multidisciplinary institutions. Subsequently, in May 2025, NCTE formulated guidelines for transforming standalone TEIs into multidisciplinary higher education institutions. These envisage three pathways: independent development through the introduction of additional undergraduate programmes; merger with an existing multidisciplinary institution; and collaboration with such an institution. While these pathways provide a useful starting point, the approach needs to be more flexible and facilitative. NCTE should proactively coordinate with multidisciplinary colleges in the vicinity of standalone TEIs, State Government Higher Education Departments, affiliating universities and UGC. The NCTE should develop a practical framework offering alternative models of transformation, taking into account geographical location, institutional capacity, management arrangements and availability of academic resources. This should be followed by a nationwide outreach programme involving State- and regional-level workshops and consultations. A dedicated task force comprising NCTE representatives, education experts and institutional stakeholders could prepare State-wise roadmaps, identify institutions requiring support, monitor progress and resolve implementation bottlenecks.

From regulation to facilitation: A mindset change

The larger challenge before NCTE is to evolve from a regulator that primarily processes applications for approvals into a facilitator that proactively reaches out to institutions, supports their transition and enables them to become centres of quality teacher education. The two recommendations of NEP 2020 are closely interdependent: eliminating substandard institutions while facilitating the transformation of viable ones. Both require a clear roadmap, institutional coordination, adequate human resources and sustained monitoring. India cannot aspire to transform its school education system without transforming the way its teachers are prepared. The quality of school education ultimately depends on the quality of teachers entering classrooms, which, in turn, rests on the institutions preparing them. The 2030 deadline is fast approaching. NCTE must move beyond incremental regulatory interventions and lead a coordinated national effort to transform teacher education. Otherwise, we may well miss a crucial opportunity to reform the very foundation of India’s school education system.