The objective should be to make education investable without making learning transactional

Six years after the introduction of the National Education Policy 2020, the gap between policy ambitions and classroom realities remains a pressing concern. Nirvaan Birla, Managing Director of Birla Open Minds, examines the challenges facing India's school education system, from uneven policy implementation and teacher preparedness to rising fees and institutional accountability. In this interview with Education Post’s Prabhav Anand, he discusses the need to maintain academic standards across expanding school networks while balancing private investment with affordability. Birla also reflects on teachers' working conditions, student mental health and why meaningful education reform must ultimately be measured by improvements in classroom learning.

1. Six years after the introduction of NEP 2020, India's school education system continues to struggle with learning gaps and unequal access to quality education. What do you see as the biggest failure in its implementation, and what reforms should the government prioritise?

I would hesitate to call NEP 2020 a failure. It has given Indian education a much-needed direction and, more importantly, shifted the conversation from merely completing syllabi to building competencies, critical thinking and holistic development. However, the real challenge has been translating this vision into consistent classroom practice.

One of the biggest gaps is the uneven capacity of schools to implement the policy. While some institutions have moved towards experiential learning, competency-based assessments and multidisciplinary education, many are still constrained by traditional teaching practices, infrastructure limitations and inadequate teacher preparedness. We have a policy that is ambitious, but its implementation ecosystem needs to catch up.

I believe the government's immediate priority should be strengthening foundational literacy and numeracy, investing in continuous teacher development, and creating stronger mechanisms to measure actual learning outcomes rather than just infrastructure or enrolment numbers.

We also need to bridge the urban-rural divide in access to quality teaching and learning resources. Technology can be an enabler, but it cannot replace a capable teacher.

Ultimately, education reform must be measured by what happens inside the classroom. A policy succeeds not when it is adopted by institutions, but when a child in a classroom experiences better learning because of it.

2. Birla Open Minds has expanded to more than 280 institutions across India. With franchise-based school networks growing rapidly, how can educational quality and accountability be maintained across schools operating under the same brand but managed independently?

Scaling an education network is fundamentally different from scaling a conventional business. A school is not simply a brand outlet; it is a living ecosystem of students, teachers, parents and communities. Every institution carries a responsibility that extends well beyond its commercial identity.

At Birla Open Minds, our approach is to establish a common academic philosophy, clear quality benchmarks and defined operating processes while allowing schools the flexibility to respond to their local communities. We believe in standardising the quality promise, not necessarily standardising every classroom experience.

This requires a structured quality assurance mechanism. Regular academic reviews, classroom observations, teacher development programmes, curriculum implementation audits, parent feedback and student learning assessments must become integral to the network. Equally important is building the capability of school leaders, because the quality of a school is often a reflection of the leadership culture it nurtures.

From a business standpoint, sustainable expansion depends on protecting the credibility of the brand. One institution's performance can influence the trust families place in the entire network. Therefore, accountability cannot be optional.

I believe the future of school networks lies in a partnership model where the central organisation provides academic direction, systems, expertise and continuous support, while the school management takes ownership of execution.

Our philosophy should be simple: every school may have its own identity, but the quality of education associated with the brand must remain consistent.

3. In an earlier interview with ET-Education, you argued that schools should be allowed to operate as companies rather than only through trusts and societies. How would such a model balance commercial investment with affordability and prevent profit considerations from affecting educational quality?

I believe we need to look at this conversation from the perspective of both educational sustainability and investment. Quality education requires significant and continuous capital — infrastructure, technology, teacher development, sports facilities, laboratories and learning resources. These investments cannot always depend on limited funding structures.

Allowing schools to operate through a more flexible corporate framework could potentially bring in greater professional management, institutional capital, better governance and long-term investment into the sector. It could also encourage innovation and improve operational efficiencies.

However, commercialisation must not be confused with compromising educational priorities. Education is a long-term commitment, and its returns cannot be evaluated through financial metrics alone. Student outcomes, teacher quality, institutional credibility and parent trust are equally important measures of success.

Any such model would need a transparent regulatory framework with clear safeguards. This could include disclosure of fee structures, defined reinvestment commitments, independent academic quality assessments, financial accountability and safeguards against excessive commercial extraction.

Affordability must remain central to the discussion. A sustainable school business model should focus on operational efficiency, responsible expansion and appropriate resource allocation rather than relying on continuous fee increases.

I would also emphasise that the debate should not be about choosing between education and business. A well-governed education institution needs both financial sustainability and academic integrity.

The objective should be to make education investable without making learning transactional.

4. Rising private school fees remain a concern for many Indian families. Should governments introduce stricter regulations on fee increases and additional charges, or would greater intervention affect the financial sustainability and autonomy of private schools?

Fee regulation is an important and sensitive subject because there are legitimate concerns on both sides. Parents want transparency, predictability and value for the investment they make in their child's education. Schools, meanwhile, have to manage rising operational costs, infrastructure investments, statutory requirements, teacher salaries and the continuous improvement of learning facilities.

I believe the answer lies in transparent and accountable fee governance rather than blanket restrictions.

A uniform cap on fee increases may not always reflect the financial realities of institutions operating in different geographies, infrastructure categories and economic environments. A school investing in specialised learning facilities or strengthening its teacher workforce may have a very different cost structure from another institution.

At the same time, schools must recognise that parents are stakeholders, not merely fee-paying customers. Fee structures, additional charges, the rationale for revisions and the utilisation of resources should be communicated clearly.

Governments can play a constructive role by establishing transparent guidelines, standardised disclosure requirements, accessible grievance redressal mechanisms and reasonable checks against arbitrary increases.

From an institutional perspective, schools must also become more conscious of cost efficiency and financial planning. Better resource utilisation, technology-enabled administration and long-term infrastructure planning can help manage costs without transferring every increase to parents.

Ultimately, the objective should be to protect parents from unreasonable financial demands while ensuring that schools remain financially viable enough to deliver quality education.

Affordability and quality should not be treated as opposing goals. The regulatory framework must enable both to coexist.

5. Despite growing emphasis on teacher training under NEP 2020, concerns over salaries, workload and professional development persist in private schools. What changes are needed to improve teachers' working conditions, and should private institutions face stronger accountability for these standards?

We often discuss educational transformation through curriculum reforms, technology and infrastructure, but we sometimes overlook the most important contributor to the learning experience , the teacher.

We cannot expect teachers to prepare children for a rapidly changing world if we do not invest in preparing and supporting teachers themselves.

The first change required is a shift in how institutions view teachers. Professional development should not be treated as an annual training requirement or a compliance exercise. It must be a continuous process that includes mentoring, classroom coaching, peer learning, exposure to new pedagogies and opportunities for professional growth.

Equally important is the need to review teachers' working conditions. Reasonable workloads, clearly defined responsibilities, fair compensation, opportunities for career progression and adequate planning time are essential. We must also recognise the emotional and administrative demands of teaching, which often go unnoticed.

I believe private institutions should be accountable for maintaining fair employment practices and providing meaningful professional development opportunities. However, accountability should encourage improvement rather than become another layer of paperwork.

At Birla Open Minds, we believe that investing in teacher capacity is directly connected to the quality of student learning. A teacher who feels supported, respected and professionally empowered is more likely to create an engaging and progressive classroom.

We also need to make teaching an aspirational profession again. This will require collaboration between policymakers, school managements and teacher education institutions.

If we want better learning outcomes for children, we must first create better working and learning environments for teachers.

6. Schools are increasingly introducing mental health and emotional well-being programmes, including initiatives such as Birla Open Minds' Soul Science. How can schools measure the effectiveness of these programmes and ensure students receive professional psychological support when needed?

For a long time, school success was largely measured through academic achievement. Today, we increasingly recognise that a child's emotional well-being, sense of belonging, resilience and ability to manage relationships are equally important to their development.

At Birla Open Minds, initiatives such as Soul Science reflect our belief that emotional and social development must be integrated into the educational journey rather than treated as an occasional intervention.

However, introducing a well-being programme is only the starting point. Schools must be able to understand whether it is making a meaningful difference in children's lives.

This requires a combination of qualitative and quantitative indicators. Schools can periodically assess students' sense of belonging, emotional awareness, peer relationships, confidence, classroom participation and ability to manage challenges. Age-appropriate student reflections, teacher observations, parent feedback and structured well-being surveys can provide useful insights over time.

It is equally important to distinguish between emotional education and psychological intervention. A classroom programme can help children identify emotions, develop empathy and learn coping strategies, but it cannot replace professional mental health support when a child needs it.

Schools should therefore establish clear referral mechanisms, ensure access to qualified counsellors and trained mental health professionals, maintain confidentiality, and work in partnership with parents and specialists. Teachers should be equipped to identify early signs of distress, but should never be expected to diagnose or provide clinical intervention.

We must also move away from treating well-being as a standalone period on the timetable. It should reflect in the way teachers interact with students, how schools address bullying, how discipline is practised and how children are encouraged to express themselves. A school should not only prepare children to succeed in life; it should also equip them with the emotional strength to navigate life.