Introduction and Purpose
Firstly, the report examines how transforming education in India requires both structural reform and shifts in stakeholder mindsets.
Moreover, it situates this inquiry within the vision of National Education Policy 2020, which promotes holistic and equitable development.
In addition, the study explores how beliefs about success, diversity, authority and reform shape how policy is interpreted and enacted.
Conceptual Foundations
To frame the analysis, the study applies the 4P framework, purpose, pedagogy, positioning, and power.
Furthermore, it integrates mindset typologies such as deficit, compliance-oriented, mobility-driven, and transformative orientations.
Consequently, transformation is understood as both structural and psychological, requiring alignment between institutional reforms and belief systems.
Methodology
From March to April 2025, researchers conducted qualitative interviews with ten national and state-level policy actors.
Specifically, participants included policymakers, bureaucrats, academicians, and NGO leaders involved in curriculum reform and program implementation.
Additionally, thematic analysis was used to interpret recurring beliefs, narratives, and assumptions shaping reform discourse.
However, findings are exploratory and reflect policy-level perspectives rather than classroom experiences.
Contextual Realities
In India, high-stakes examinations strongly influence definitions of educational success.
Similarly, intense labor market competition reinforces credential-driven aspirations linked to upward mobility.
As a result, assessment practices often prioritize recall-based competencies over deeper learning and socioemotional development.
Meanwhile, marginalized students rely on schools as spaces of stability, belonging, and identity formation.
Nevertheless, systemic incentives frequently privilege measurable outcomes over holistic development.
Purpose: Redefining Success
Although the National Education Policy 2020 promotes holistic learning, many actors continue equating success with salary, credentials, and examination results.
Consequently, academic achievement often dominates narratives about student potential and social mobility.
Moreover, deficit-oriented explanations sometimes attribute failure to individual shortcomings rather than structural barriers.
At the same time, some stakeholders advocate broader aims including empathy, civic responsibility, and socioemotional growth.
Thus, tension persists between holistic aspirations and entrenched outcome-driven expectations.
Pedagogy: Equity and Inclusion
The policy envisions learner-centered, experiential, multilingual, and competency-based pedagogy.
However, participants suggested that compliance pressures and exam-oriented cultures may constrain inclusive practices.
In particular, diversity is sometimes approached through uniform standards rather than contextual responsiveness.
Therefore, one-size-fits-all expectations may unintentionally frame differences as deficit.
Ultimately, achieving inclusive pedagogy requires shifts in both institutional arrangements and beliefs about learner capability.
Positioning: From Fragmentation to Coherence
Participants emphasized that implementation often remains fragmented across curriculum, assessment, and teacher education.
Meanwhile, accountability systems encourage short-term delivery instead of sustained transformation.
Consequently, actors may prioritize procedural compliance over relational and iterative change.
In addition, societal hierarchies related to caste, gender, and class intersect with school practices.
Thus, coherence depends on aligning structures with shared understanding of agency and responsibility.
Power: Governance and Agency
Although the policy promotes decentralization and teacher empowerment, governance cultures are often perceived as hierarchical.
Furthermore, deficit-based narratives about teachers and students may legitimize corrective or punitive policy approaches.
Likewise, centralized data-driven accountability can be experienced as control rather than support.
Therefore, redistributing power requires changing assumptions about authority, trust, and voice.
Implications for Transformation
Overall, the findings suggest that meaningful reform cannot rely solely on policy design.
Instead, sustainable transformation requires cultivating mindsets grounded in empathy, trust, and shared purpose.
Additionally, relational infrastructure, collaboration, and reflective practice are central to lasting change.
Finally, aligning purpose, pedagogy, positioning, and power offers a pathway toward enabling every young person in India to thrive.
Source:
Ravindranath, S., Bhatnagar, A., Saini, S., Kumar, A. V., Rijo, J. T., Hui, C., Olateju, M., & Dyl, R. (2025). Learning what matters in India: Shifting mindsets: Transforming education systems that enable every young person to thrive. Center for Universal Education at Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/260304-BLS-BRO-NEST-India-V04.pdf