This report is one of three case studies produced as part of the Strengthening Pedagogical Approaches for Relevant Knowledge and Skills (SPARKS) project.
Executive summary
This report describes a comparative case study that examined how Invisible Pedagogical Mindsets (IPMs)—the interplay of culture, local education ecosystems, and preferred learning theories—shape implementation of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 in India in four states: Uttarakhand, Telangana, Jharkhand, and Goa.
The study’s findings reveal that the interplay of IPMs filters how teachers interpret and enact the NEP 2020’s student-centered vision within their contexts.
- Culture. Teachers frame education as a moral and relational endeavor, enacting care, dignity, and trust in diverse classrooms; yet, this emotional labor remains largely invisible and unsupported, and gendered and linguistic hierarchies continue to shape participation and pedagogical practices.
- Education ecosystem. Teacher agency is constrained by administrative overload, uneven implementation, and limited systemic supports; peer learning is largely informal, and resource and infrastructure gaps hinder pedagogical change in the classroom.
- Learning theories. Teachers’ beliefs often align with the NEP 2020’s vision for student-centered, experiential pedagogical approaches; however, preservice and in-service teacher training remain overly theoretical and insufficiently connected to classroom realities.
Taken together, these findings indicate that effective reform requires attention not only to instructional outcomes but also to the emotional and relational conditions that enable students and teachers to thrive. Implementation should be gradual, relational, and responsive to India’s sociocultural diversity. The analysis underscores the need to shift from externally designed models of teaching and learning to cocreated pedagogical approaches grounded in local epistemologies and teacher identities.
Based on these findings, this report provides four recommendations for policymakers:
- Address structural constraints by conducting system-wide audits of teachers’ administrative workload. Teacher agency is limited by excessive administrative duties, inconsistent training, and fragmented systems. Non-teaching duties reduce time for lesson planning and classroom instruction. To fulfill NEP 2020’s mandate to free teachers from non-teaching duties, systems should conduct workload audits, hire adequate support staff, enforce scheduling guidelines, and integrate monitoring mechanisms to protect teaching time.
- Center contextual, practice-based inquiry and community-driven and indigenous pedagogical knowledge as core principles of preservice and in-service teacher training. Teachers support the integration of experiential and student-centered pedagogy into their practices; however, training remains overly theoretical and disconnected from classroom realities. Bridge theory and practice by embedding reflective, skill-based, and locally grounded approaches such as iterative learning cycles, lesson studies, peer coaching, and communities of practice. Introduce post-training reflections that can help teachers translate theory to practice and recognize teachers’ classroom innovations as sources of professional knowledge.
- Incorporate teacher well-being as a formal component of education policy and professional development. Teachers’ emotional labor and moral commitment are central to their work but remain unrecognized. Support care-centered pedagogical practices by formalizing well-being policies, appointing mental health professionals for schools, encouraging arts-based reflections, journaling, and other therapeutic exercises, and recognizing teachers’ care and dedication through awards and published narratives that celebrate the emotional labor and relational pedagogy practiced by teachers.
- Create opportunities for teachers’ voices to actively inform education reform and policy. Teachers are key interpreters of reform, yet they are often excluded from the policy design process. Strengthen reform coherence by institutionalizing teacher consultation at all levels, diversifying representation in curriculum and training committees, creating feedback mechanisms that channel classroom insights into curriculum, assessment, and teacher training priorities. Encourage collaborative research models like Research Policy Collaboratives (RPCs) to translate teacher experiences into actionable policy adjustments.
Authors
Related Content
-
Acknowledgements and disclosures
We extend our sincere gratitude to the members of the SPARKS Global Network for their invaluable support and feedback over the past two years. For their collaboration and guidance on this project, our heartfelt thanks go to our RPC members—Dr. Hazari Shirisha (Telangana), Smt. Prameetha Adoni (Karnataka), Dr. Avinav Kumar (Jharkhand), Dr. Pushkarni Panchamukhi, and Dr. Aditi Arur.
We would also like to thank Ms. Suchetha Bhat, Mr. Vishal Talreja, and Mr. Sharique Mashhadi for their unwavering support throughout this journey. Our special thanks to Dr. Karen Edge for her thoughtful engagement and encouragement in multiple capacities over the course of this project.
We are grateful to Dr. Jagpreet Kaur for her careful review and to our colleagues at the Center for Universal Education, Dr. Emily Morris and Dr. Rebecca Winthrop, for their roles as reviewer and editor, respectively. We also thank Dr. Rachael Graham Tin and The Other Design Studio for their contributions to editing and design.
Photographs courtesy of photographers Mr. Prasanna H, Moalong Longchari and Orjia Creations, used with permission. We gratefully acknowledge their contribution to the report’s visuals.
Brookings gratefully acknowledges the support provided by the LEGO Foundation.
Brookings recognizes that the value it provides is in its commitment to quality, independence, and impact. Activities supported by its donors reflect this commitment.
The Brookings Institution is committed to quality, independence, and impact.
We are supported by a diverse array of funders. In line with our values and policies, each Brookings publication represents the sole views of its author(s).
