NEP 2020, Five Years On: Curricular flexibility improves, but multiple entry-exit remains rigid

The most visible impact of the NEP has been the shift away from rigid disciplinary boundaries. Nearly 90% of surveyed institutions now report offering flexible, multidisciplinary curricula, often integrated with vocational components.

Environmental education is nearly universal, and ethics-based courses such as Mulya Pravah 2.0 are now offered by 62% of institutions.

The multiple entry and exit points — touted as a revolutionary student-centric reform — has failed to take root meaningfully. Just 36% of HEIs surveyed have implemented this provision, and only 64% maintain records in the Academic Bank of Credits (ABC), the mechanism required for credit portability. 

Implementation of Key NEP Curriculum Reforms – shows institutional uptake of reforms like curriculum flexibility and Academic Bank of Credits.

Mental health services: Support centres exist, partnerships don’t

The NEP placed significant emphasis on improving student well-being. Nearly 86% of institutions report having a dedicated student services centre to address emotional and psychological needs.

However, majority (54%) reported having MoUs with mental health institutions like NIMHANS or AIIMS, the report found.

This shortfall is further reflected in faculty preparedness: while the NEP encourages teacher training in counselling and mentoring, only 64% of HEIs reported that their faculty undergo refresher courses on mental health support. A lack of formal training could limit the efficacy of mental wellness services already in place.

Professors of Practice: A policy idea yet to be realised

A major NEP goal was to bring industry closer to academia by appointing ‘Professors of Practice’ (PoPs) to teach applied, experience-based courses. However, this vision remains far from realised.

While many HEIs support the idea in principle, only 14% of institutions have actually appointed such professors. Likewise, 81% of HEIs involve distinguished industry experts and professors of practice for consultancy.

Internships have become more widespread, 98% of institutions offer them with academic credit but deeper, sustained industry engagement through curriculum and faculty collaboration remains largely limited.

Institutional autonomy is another key NEP provision that has seen little movement

According to the QS I-GAUGE Implementation Report, just 22% of institutions currently enjoy autonomous status. What are the barriers? Nothing out of the blue: 153 institutions cite financial dependence as a key issue, 143 mention bureaucratic delays, and 131 point to limited institutional capacity.

But does institutional autonomy really matter? Short answer, yes. It restricts the ability of HEIs to redesign curricula, establish interdisciplinary departments, or forge international partnerships, all crucial to the NEP’s vision of ‘globally competitive’ Indian universities.

Internationalisation remains a long term goal

Global collaboration has not kept pace with NEP’s ambitions. Fewer than half the institutions surveyed (41%) have signed MoUs with foreign universities. Just 33% have not reserved seats, and 67% have reserved seats for international students. Moreover, 39% institutes have no dedicated infrastructure to host them while 61% have dedicated infrastructure.

Cross-border research collaboration is also underwhelming, with 55% faculty collaborate with international faculties and 45% do not.

In effect, while the aspiration for global engagement is widespread, the ecosystem to support it, infrastructure, regulatory ease, and funding, remains weak.

Indian Knowledge Systems: Visible interest, lack of real execution

The NEP’s emphasis on Indian Knowledge Systems (IKS) has led to the introduction of electives in areas like Ayurveda, Yoga, Sanskrit, and ancient sciences. But progress here is slow and inconsistent, the report has revealed.

According to the QS I-GAUGE report, 64% institutions offer short-term non-degree niche courses about Yoga/Philosophy/ Ayurveda/Health/Sanskrit/Vaastushastra/etc.

Only 38% of institutions offer IKS electives for credit, and just 36% run short-term non-degree courses in these domains. Notably, a mere 8% of HEIs have empanelled ‘Kala Gurus’, traditional scholars meant to teach and research indigenous knowledge.

The report notes that while IKS enjoys rhetorical support, its practical implementation is often limited by a lack of teaching staff, infrastructure, or institutional clarity on integrating traditional and modern epistemologies.

Knowledge clusters and research ecosystems: Limited collaboration

NEP envisioned universities pooling resources and forming large knowledge clusters to promote research and innovation. Nearly, 61% institutions are a part of a HEI knowledge cluster.

Moreover, only 64% of institutions reported collaboration with regional R&D partners, pointing to the early stages of a research ecosystem that NEP aims to build.

Digital education: A bright spot with uneven access

One of NEP’s strongest adoption areas has been digital learning. According to the report, 96% of institutions use platforms like SWAYAM, DIKSHA, or SWAYAM PRABHA. Additionally, 94% report investment in digital infrastructure, and 85% offer faculty training in creating high-quality online content.

Digital Readiness of Higher Education Institutions – indicating adoption of MOOCs, digital infra investment, and use of national e-learning platforms.

Yet, equitable access remains a challenge. According to the QS I-GAUGE report, 76% institutions offer two-year postgraduate diploma courses via an open and distance learning mechanism. And while MOOCs are accepted for credit in 72% of institutions, standardised assessment and integration into degree programs are still evolving.

What’s the road ahead for NEP?

The NEP has succeeded in reshaping perceptions around higher education in India. Over the last five years, several new public institutions including the Indian Institute of Heritage and multiple Central Tribal Universities have been launched. Funding models are being reconsidered, and digital learning is seeing greater traction than before.

Yet, as the QS I-GAUGE report shows, India’s higher education reform remains a work in progress. The policy vision is in place, but its realisation depends on operational support, targeted funding, and regulatory simplification. Without addressing foundational issues like faculty shortages and financial dependency, even the best policy ideas risk being stuck in an implementation limbo.