Authors : Sara Fathima; Dr. Pallavi Pandey

Volume/Issue : Volume 9 - 2024, Issue 8 - August

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/muhds5e6

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/y8s7tmt7

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24AUG529

Abstract : The New Education Policy (NEP) 2020 represents a transformative blueprint for India's education landscape, encompassing various aspects of learning, teaching methodologies, and educational infrastructure. This paper explores the intricate dynamics and implications of the NEP 2020, particularly within the context of primary education in India. The study aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the potential consequences, challenges, and benefits associated with this policy reform. Through a thorough investigation, this research seeks to understand the fundamental changes envisioned by the NEP 2020 and their direct impact on primary education. Key features of the NEP have been reviewed, drawing insights from various sources, including academic publications, reports, newspapers, and government websites. The findings indicate that overall public awareness of the NEP is below average, with variations observed based on demographic factors such as gender, location, type of institution, years of service, and family background.

Keywords : Awareness of National Educational Policy India 2020, Secondary School Teachers Education Policy, Development, Higher Education, Teachers, and Telangana State.

References :

1. Aithal, P. S., & Aithal, S. (2019). Analysis of Higher Education in Indian National Education Policy Proposal 2019 and Its Implementation Challenges. International Journal of Applied Engineering and Management Letters (IJAEML), 3(2), 1-35.
2. Aithal, P. S., Aithal, Shubhrajyotsna (2019). Analysis of Higher Education in Indian National Education Policy Proposal 2019 and its Implementation Challenges. International Journal of Applied Engineering and Management Letters (IJAEML), 3(2), 1-35.
3. Aithal, P. S., & Aithal, A. (2018). The Concept and Importance of Alternative Strategy as Parallel Strategy to be followed in Organizational Decisions to Ensure Success. International Journal of Management, Technology, and Social Sciences (IJMTS), 3(2), 1-15.
4. Aithal, P. S., & Kumar, P. M. (2016). Organizational behavior in the 21st century–‘Theory A' for managing people for performance. IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSRJBM), 18(7), 126-134.
5. Ball, S., Bowe, R., & Gewirtz, S. (1996). School choice, social class and distinction: the realization of social advantage in education. Journal of Education Policy, 11(1), 89–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268093960110105.
6. Benson, M., Bridge, G., & Wilson, D. (2014). School choice in London and Paris—a comparison of middle-class strategies. Social Policy & Administration, 49(1), 24–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12079.
7. Burger, K. (2010).  How does early childhood care and education affect cognitive development? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25(2), 140-165.
8. Daugherty, P. J., & Pittman, P. H. (1995). Utilization of time‐based strategies. International Journal of operations & Production Management. 15(2), 54-60.
9. Dodgson, M. (1991). Technology learning, technology strategy, and competitive pressures. British Journal of Management, 2(3), 133-149.
10. Garvis S, Lunneblad J. (2018). Inequalities in access to early childhood education and care in Sweden. In: Erhard K, Scholz A, Harring, D. (eds). The Equal Access Study (pp. 30–34). ICEC Working Paper Series. 1.
11. Ghosh, S., & Dey, D. (2020). Public or private? determinants of parents’ preschool choice in India. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 14(3), 16–32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40723-020-00068-0.
12. Goldring, E., & Phillips, K. (2008). Parent preferences and parent choices: the public-private decision about school choice. Journal of Education Policy, 23(3), 209–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930801987844.
13. Holmes Erickson, H. (2017). How do parents choose schools, and what schools do they choose? a literature review of private school choice programs in the United States. Journal of School Choice, 11(4), 491–506. https://doi.org/10. 1080/15582159.2017.1395618.
14. Kampichler, M., Dvořáčková, J., & Jarkovská, L. (2018). Choosing the right kindergarten: parents’ reasoning about their ECEC choices in the context of the diversifcation of ECEC programs. Journal of Pedagogy, 9(2), 9–32. https://doi. org/10.2478/jped-2018-0009.
15. Karlsson, M., Löfdahl, A., & Pérez Prieto, H. (2013). Morality in parents’ stories of preschool choice: narrating identity positions of good parenting. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(2), 208–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692. 2012.714248.
16. Morris, R., & Perry, T. (2019). Private schools for free? parents’ reasons for choosing a new free school for their child. Cambridge Journal of Education, 49(5), 535–552. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2019.1571561.
17. Papke-Shields, K. E., & Boyer-Wright, K. M. (2017). Strategic planning characteristics applied to project management. International Journal of Project Management, 35(2), 169-179.
18. Strickland, D. & Riley-Ayers, S. (2006).  Early Literacy: Policy and Practice in the Preschool Years. April 2006, Issue 10, Preschool Policy Brief National Institute for Early Education Research Retrieved from http://nieer.org/resources/policybriefs/10.pdf. https://www.readingrockets.org/article/early-literacy-policy-and-practice-preschool-years.
19. Storch, S. A., & Whitehurst, G. J. (2002). Oral language and code-related precursors to reading: Evidence from a longitudinal structural model. Developmental Psychology, 38, 934–947.
20. Sunil Kumar Saroha, & Uttam Anand (2020). New instruction procedure 2020 Highlights: To see huge movements in schools and advanced edification. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS) Volume 25, Issue 8, Series 4 (August. 2020) 59-62 e-ISSN: 2279-0837, p-ISSN: 2279-0845.
21. Vamstad, J. (2016). Bottom-up childcare in a top-down welfare state: explaining cooperative organization among Swedish parents. International Review of Sociology, 26(1), 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2016.1148345.