NEP raises concerns over diluting ICSE–ISC’s rigorous academic framework

Concerns over the New Education Policy (NEP) took a sharper turn on Monday as voices from the ICSE and ISC school ecosystem warned that forcing uniformity and “simplification” of curricula risks undermining one of India’s most demanding academic boards. Critics argue that ICSE–ISC has historically been known for its depth, analytical rigor and broad-based learning , and any attempt to make it “easier” under the NEP framework would weaken its core philosophy.

Addressing school heads at a major ICSE–ISC gathering in Kolkata, Trinamool Congress Rajya Sabha MP Derek O’Brien echoed a sentiment widely shared among educators—that rigour should not be mistaken for burden . Drawing an analogy, educationists liken the push to standardise or dilute ICSE–ISC standards to banning IIT coaching centres simply because the IIT-JEE is difficult . “The solution to difficulty is not dilution, but better support and resources,” said a senior school principal present at the conference.

ICSE and ISC pedagogy are designed to encourage conceptual clarity, extensive reading, critical writing and interdisciplinary thinking , often placing students at an advantage in higher education, both in India and abroad. Educators fear that NEP-driven restructuring, if imposed without flexibility, could erode this academic strength in the name of uniform assessment and accessibility.

O’Brien criticised the NEP as centralising and dismissive of existing systems , pointing out that states like West Bengal, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka have already developed their own education policies. He argued that ignoring these frameworks creates confusion for schools that follow national boards like ICSE–ISC but operate within state jurisdictions.

Minority-run institutions, which form a significant part of the ICSE–ISC network, also expressed concern that the NEP’s approach could interfere with their constitutional rights under Article 30 , particularly in curriculum design and institutional autonomy.

Another major issue raised was funding. While the NEP recommends 6 per cent of GDP expenditure on education , actual spending remains around 3–4 per cent , raising questions about how ambitious reforms can be implemented without adequate financial backing.

Educationists emphasised that academic excellence cannot be legislated into uniformity . “ICSE–ISC has never been about convenience it has been about competence,” one school head remarked. As debate over the NEP continues, the message from this section of the education community is clear: making a tough system easier does not make education better, it makes it weaker .