In light of the growing new skill requirements from the public and private sectors, as well as the low performance of existing vocational training and skill generation schemes, the imperative of reforming the mainstream education system to align academic curricula with the changing demands of public and private players, particularly industries, was necessary. This was the reason cited for the formation of the National Education Policy, 2020, which aimed to integrate vocational training and skill development programs into the mainstream curriculum to equip students with practical and job-ready skills.

The New Courses Overcrowd the Existing Infrastructure 
The proponents of NEP argue with stark optimism that courses under the new education policy are directed at holistic development of individual potential with its broad objectives ranged from enhancement of communication skills to promotion of scientific and data-based thinking onto creativity, innovation, values of aesthetics and art, health and fitness, wellness, sports, collaboration and teamwork, and problem-solving and logical reasoning.

The new courses claim to facilitate the learning of behavioural skills, such as resilience, agility, innovation, and adaptability. The acquisition of these qualities and skills will not only enable individuals to meet the various requirements of employment in multifaceted sectors but also enable them to harness their existing skills in the emerging market scenario. Considering current industrial needs, the NEP focuses on technical education in emerging areas such as Artificial Intelligence (AI), 3D machining, big data analysis, machine learning, genomic studies, biotechnology, nanotechnology, and neuroscience by integrating these subjects into undergraduate education.

However, amid this larger optimistic picture provided by the inclusive, multidimensional, and multidisciplinary nature of the syllabus, myriad grey areas need to be considered against the backdrop of the overall educational infrastructure, faculty strength, budgetary allocation to education, and availability of trained personnel. Some structural gaps that engender uncertainties also need to be addressed to make progress under the NEP more effective and meaningful.

The most glaring flaw appears to be the implementation of this ambitious syllabus with the existing educational infrastructure and faculty strength. The Multidisciplinary courses, Value-added courses, and Skill Enhancement Courses offered under the new education policy are numerous, but institutions are hard-pressed to choose only those courses that can be taught by existing faculty members. Without proper training in the new courses and due to a lack of adequate faculty members, institutions often feel compelled to implement the syllabus without sufficient readiness. They often try to manage the classes rather than doing them justice.

To assess the progress of students in various multidisciplinary courses, a complex examination pattern has been introduced, incorporating assignments and surprise tests into the existing semester-based examination system. The NEP has made academics more examination-oriented. The more students are engaged in examinations, the less time they can afford to learn. The existing faculty members become overburdened with the evaluation of assignments and other tests.

With the unfavourable teacher-student ratio in India, focus on teaching each subject in vernacular languages further compounds the existing challenges. The introduction of study materials in mother tongues would create further pressure on institutions and their teachers to shift their teaching methods, which often involve a blending of regional languages with English, to one focused exclusively on regional languages, with which most teachers are unfamiliar and for which no corpus of knowledge exists.

Headwinds of Unpredictability 
NEP incorporates a multiple exit structure with certificates. This implies that students can choose to leave these skill enhancement courses midway, thereby rupturing their learning and training curve, and still receive certificates. Their ability to develop critical thinking stops short of maturing. With their half-skilled qualifications, students are likely to struggle to secure top-notch jobs in the knowledge economy.

The Central Government must ensure that the courses are not too short to instil and train people in the requisite development of skills. The target to enhance students' enrolment under the NEP further creates unpredictability, as more and more students join the courses and leave them midway, generating uncertainties as to how many students will ultimately study at the University level.

Nonetheless, there is a pressing need for more universities to absorb the bulge of students. A maximum 4-year duration of the graduation courses would discourage students from completing the courses, as leaving them unfinished with certificates does not guarantee a job. The Central Government must ensure that the certificates received at the end of each academic year carry enough weight to get a job in the public or private sector.

Considering the low budgetary allocations by the Central and State Governments towards education, the transformations in the skills landscape that have been envisaged by the NEP within a decade are far from reality.

To make any meaningful progress, a far higher proportion of the Union and State budgets needs to be allocated to education, considering it a sector of priority. There is a need for better and higher-quality digital infrastructure to implement the NEP, which, apart from aiming to improve low skills, also targets the enhancement of high skills such as AI, cybersecurity, and robotic technologies.

Collaboration with developed countries and their universities becomes a priority, and more emphasis needs to be placed on Research and Development, with increased budgetary allocations towards these objectives. The central government must ensure that it retains ultimate control over the development of these sensitive technologies. Hence, the NEP requires substantial investments in infrastructural transformation to bring about real and meaningful changes in curricula, aiming to upskill the masses.

In the new policy framework, more emphasis should have been placed on skills associated with modernising agriculture and agro-based industries, as a significant portion of the population in India still obtains employment in the agricultural sector.

There should have been clear mechanisms to ensure and assess whether the funds apportioned by the Central and State governments towards skill enhancement courses have actually benefited the targeted individuals.

The NEP allows private higher educational institutions to set their own fees for their programmes. However, they have a social responsibility to provide free education to 20 percent and scholarships to 30 percent of students which will incentivise the bright students of poor backgrounds to opt for private education but redistribution of funding within the public education realm through increased inclusion of private players might lead to squeezing of capital for many government scholarships for minority and backward classes. While involving private players, the government must ensure that students from poor socio-economic backgrounds are not deprived of the necessary government support for acquiring new skills.

Clear governmental mechanisms must be put in place to ensure that more capital from private and philanthropic actors is diverted to upskilling an increasing number of people living in rural India with backwards socio-economic backgrounds. Otherwise, the entire skill learning exercise becomes elitist by nature.