PM-SHRI Scheme Sparks Political Debate in Kerala

The PM Schools for Rising India (PM-SHRI) scheme has recently gained attention in Kerala due to political disagreements. The CPI(M)-led Left Democratic Front (LDF) government has agreed to implement the scheme after initially opposing it. This decision has caused friction within the ruling coalition and criticism from the opposition Congress party. Kerala has signed a Memorandum of About (MoU) with the Centre, committing to the scheme despite concerns about fully adopting the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.

Overview of PM-SHRI Scheme

The PM-SHRI scheme was approved in 2022 by the Government of India. It aims to transform 14,500 schools across the country into model institutions reflecting the NEP 2020’s principles. These schools include elementary to senior secondary levels and are managed by central, state, or local governments. So far, 13,070 schools have been selected, including Kendriya Vidyalayas and Navodaya Vidyalayas. The scheme promotes innovative teaching methods, vocational training, skill development labs, and infrastructure improvements. It emphasises competency-based assessments and aims to reduce dropout rates while improving learning outcomes.

Implementation Guidelines and Funding

PM-SHRI schools must follow either the National Curriculum Framework or a state curriculum aligned with NEP 2020. The Education Ministry has introduced a School Quality Assessment Framework to monitor progress. Funding is shared between the Centre and states in a 60:40 ratio. Schools’ funding depends on their performance scores under this framework. The scheme is linked to the broader Samagra Shiksha programme, which supports various educational entitlements and resources.

Political Responses and State Participation

Kerala’s initial refusal to implement PM-SHRI stemmed from objections to adopting the NEP in full and concerns about branding schools with the ‘PM-SHRI’ label. Other states like Tamil Nadu and West Bengal have also resisted the scheme for similar reasons. However, Delhi, Punjab, Karnataka, Telangana, and Himachal Pradesh have agreed to participate. The Kerala LDF government’s recent MoU signing has sparked criticism from within its ranks and the opposition, who allege political pressure and question the decision’s rationale.

Financial Implications for Kerala

Kerala has not received Centre funds under Samagra Shiksha for 2024-25 and 2025-26 due to its refusal to implement PM-SHRI earlier. The state has used its share of funds for essential services but faces pending commitments like scholarships and uniforms. The decision to sign the MoU is seen as a move to unlock these funds. Kerala’s Education Minister has clarified that the state will implement only those NEP provisions it deems feasible, particularly regarding curriculum and textbooks.

Current Status and Challenges

The MoU requires states to implement NEP 2020 in entirety, a point of contention for Kerala and other holdout states. The Centre’s insistence on full compliance and branding has been a major obstacle. Kerala’s partial acceptance reflects a compromise between securing funding and maintaining some autonomy over education policies. The political debate marks broader tensions between state and central governments over education reforms.

Questions for UPSC:

1. Critically discuss the challenges in implementing the National Education Policy 2020 across diverse states in India.
2. Examine the role of central funding schemes like Samagra Shiksha in shaping state education policies and autonomy.
3. Analyse the impact of political ideologies on education reforms in federal systems like India, with reference to recent state responses to PM-SHRI.
4. Estimate the benefits and drawbacks of competency-based assessments versus traditional rote learning in the Indian education system.

Answer Hints:

1. Critically discuss the challenges in implementing the National Education Policy 2020 across diverse states in India.

1. India’s states have varied socio-cultural, linguistic, and educational contexts, complicating uniform NEP adoption.
2. Some states resist full NEP implementation due to concerns over loss of local curriculum autonomy and linguistic identity.
3. Financial constraints and infrastructural gaps hinder uniform application of NEP reforms, especially in rural areas.
4. Political opposition and ideological differences affect willingness to adopt NEP provisions fully.
5. States like Kerala and Tamil Nadu have opposed full NEP implementation citing concerns over central imposition and branding issues.
6. Coordination challenges between Centre and states in aligning policy goals with ground realities slow down implementation.

2. Examine the role of central funding schemes like Samagra Shiksha in shaping state education policies and autonomy.

1. Central funding under schemes like Samagra Shiksha is linked to states’ compliance with central education policies (e.g., PM-SHRI, NEP).
2. States refusing to implement linked schemes (Kerala, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu) face withholding of crucial funds, pressuring policy alignment.
3. Funding dependency reduces states’ autonomy in deciding curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment frameworks.
4. States balance between securing funds and retaining control over education content and implementation strategies.
5. Samagra Shiksha funds support critical entitlements like uniforms, textbooks, and support for differently-abled children, making them vital.
6. Political and administrative negotiations occur around fund release and policy adherence, reflecting federal tensions.

3. Analyse the impact of political ideologies on education reforms in federal systems like India, with reference to recent state responses to PM-SHRI.

1. Left-leaning governments (Kerala LDF, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu DMK) resist NEP-linked reforms citing ideological opposition to centralization.
2. Political parties’ stances reflect broader views on federal autonomy, cultural identity, and education’s role in society.
3. Internal coalition disagreements (e.g., CPI vs CPI(M) in Kerala) show ideological divides even within political alliances.
4. Opposition parties accuse ruling coalitions of political compromises or pressure from central government influencing education policy shifts.
5. States’ acceptance or rejection of PM-SHRI reflects how ideology intersects with practical concerns like funding and infrastructure needs.
6. Federalism in education leads to politicization of reforms, affecting uniform policy rollout and causing regional disparities.

4. Estimate the benefits and drawbacks of competency-based assessments versus traditional rote learning in the Indian education system.

1. Competency-based assessments focus on understanding, application, and skill mastery rather than memorization.
2. This approach encourages critical thinking, creativity, and problem-solving, aligning with global education trends.
3. Rote learning, though criticized, is entrenched and often seen as easier to administer and standardize in large-scale exams.
4. Transition challenges include teacher training gaps, resource constraints, and resistance from students/parents accustomed to rote methods.
5. Competency assessments can reduce dropout rates by making learning more engaging and relevant to real-life skills.
6. Implementation requires robust infrastructure, continuous evaluation frameworks, and cultural shifts in education mindset.