Education Policy Reform in South Asia: A Comparative Analysis of India’s National Education Policy 2020 and Bhutan’s National Education Policy 2024

Abstract

National education policies play a critical role in shaping equitable, future-ready, and culturally grounded education systems in an increasingly dynamic global context. This study employs a comparative qualitative deductive content analysis to examine India’s National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and Bhutan’s National Education Policy (NEP) 2024, focusing on their philosophical foundations, educational structures, curriculum reforms, and assessment strategies. Bhutan’s policy, guided by the Gross National Happiness (GNH) framework, emphasises holistic development, sustainability, cultural identity, and values-based education, with a strong focus on localised implementation and learner well-being. In contrast, India’s policy, rooted in constitutional values and Indian ethos, seeks to transform the education system to enhance global competitiveness, promote multilingualism, and achieve a hundred per cent Gross Enrolment Ratio by 2030 through a restructured 5+3+3+4 educational framework. Both policies prioritise inclusivity, equity, and competency-based learning. Curriculum reforms in both countries highlight experiential learning, digital literacy, and interdisciplinary approaches. However, Bhutan places comparatively greater emphasis on socio-emotional development and environmental sustainability, while India focuses more extensively on systemic transformation, research, and institutional reform. Assessment reforms in both contexts reflect a shift toward competency-based evaluation. Bhutan conducts national board examinations at Grades X and XII, administered by the Bhutan Council for School Examinations and Assessment, as well as diagnostic national assessments at other levels. India, on the other hand, introduces comprehensive assessment reforms through frameworks such as PARAKH to standardise evaluation practices and promote holistic learner assessment. The study contributes to comparative education policy discourse by identifying key convergences and contextual differences between the two systems. It highlights opportunities for cross-national learning and suggests that future research should examine policy implementation, educational outcomes, and avenues for regional collaboration in strengthening education systems.