NATIONAL EDUCATION POLICY 2009

P R ES E N TAT I O N BY

SHAHID UMAR
M.PHIL PUBLIC POLICY
PIDE, ISLAMABAD
Contents:
• Introduction to National Education Policy 2009
• The need for new education policy
• Focus of NEP 2009
• Salient features of the policy
• Strengths and Weaknesses
• Conclusion
• Recommendations/Suggestions
Introduction
• Before the expiration of National Education Policy (NEP) for the period of 1998 to 2010, the
government announced the new National Education Policy (NEP) for the next decade in 2009,
called the "National Education Policy (2009)".As the Education Policy (1998 - 2010) was not
producing the desired results, the review process for the National Education Policy 1998-2010
was initiated in 2005 and the White Paper was finalized in March 2007. The White Paper
became the basis for development of the new Education Policy.
The Need for a new NEP
• There were two main reason that prompted Ministry of education to launch a policy before
time horizon of NEP 1998-2010
• 1. The previous policy was not producing desired result and performance remained deficient in
several aspects like quality and equity in getting education
• 2. The second reason behind the policy was international education for all (EFA).
Focus of NEP 2009
• This policy identifies the two fundamental causes that lie behind deficiencies in educational
performance.
• 1. Commitment Gap
• 2. Implementation Gap
• So, the policy focused on filling these gaps
Salient features of educational policy 2009

• Uniformity in education system

• Globalization
• Social cohesion
• Bridging public private gap
• Overcoming structural divides
• Management and planning capacity
• Involvement of communities
• Elementary education
• Secondary and higher education
• Literacy and formal education
Strengths:
• Recognizing and accepting the responsibility of current situation. (quality and equity of
education and access rate)
• Involvement of all stakeholders
• Globalization aspect (Millennium Development Goals and Dakar Education for All (EFA) goals)
• The Policy is based on a lengthy process of consultation initiated in 2005, in line with the
roadmap endorsed by the Inter-provincial Education Ministers’
Weaknesses:
• Incremental approach
Gaps during implementation:
• Poor communication system
• Weak administration
• Poor policy evaluation mechanisms
• Financial gaps
• Inefficient bureaucratic structure
• Deeply entrenched corruption
• Lack of political will
Conclusion
• The government had set a target in its education policy to bring all children from 6 to 10 years
in elementary schools by 2015 and to increase the literacy rate to 85% by 2015, The
government had set the target but no plan had been made to encourage the children as well as
adults to take admission in the schools.
• Financial allocation of 7% of GDP by 2015.
• Increase in higher education enrolment from 4.7 percent to 10 percent in 2015 and 15 percent
in 2020.
• With no data provided to show any projections that might have been carried out. In the
absence of any such projections, these numbers seemed more of a wish-list than the result of
any careful planning and deliberation.
Recommendations
• All stakeholders such as teachers, principals, and researchers may be involved or informed on
policy formulation and implementation. In this way the gap of understanding would be
resolved
• Strong coordination between the schools and the inspectorate may help in bridging the gulf of
mistrust and alienation
• Accountability system may be strengthened to decrease corruption
• In order to overcome financial constraints, practical measures may be taken for effective
planning and utilization of available resources both human and material
• Public Expenditure on education should be increased to it least 3.00 percent of GDP to
overcome financial contraints.
CONTD…
• Through strong accountability, the prevalence of corruption, nepotism and favoritism could be
controlled.
• The people involved in the process of formulation, implementation and evaluation of policies
can be trained to enhance their theoretical knowledge in skills in better administration,
management and coordination.
• A strong bond or relationship between the beneficiary community and policy makers can
decrease the trust deficit between the system and public.
• The step of decentralization should be strengthened. It will decrease the delays in
implementation of measures taken at the central level.
THANK YOU
FOR YOUR
PATIENCE