"Education policy works best when it listens to little footsteps—one state at a time."

The introduction of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 has set the stage for a paradigm shift in Indian education, aiming to create a system rooted in equity, flexibility, and holistic development. Among the key reforms is revising the minimum age for admission to Grade 1, now officially set at 6 years. While this change aligns with developmental science and global best practices, its practical rollout has revealed significant challenges.

Ms. Mary Shanti Priya, Principal of Vista International School Hyderabad, brings a balanced and insightful lens to this pressing issue. As an award-winning educator, textbook author, and advocate for progressive learning, she draws on her extensive experience in teaching, administration, and curriculum design to highlight how education reforms in India must bridge vision with reality.

Understanding the Shift: From 10+2 to 5+3+3+4

The shift to the 5+3+3+4 curricular structure under NEP 2020 redefines the educational timeline. The first five years comprise the Foundational Stage, covering three years of preschool or ECCE followed by Grades 1 and 2. The goal is to ensure children enter formal schooling with appropriate cognitive, emotional, and social readiness.

Mandating children to be 6 years old for Grade 1 aims to give every learner a strong developmental start. This age norm is backed by child development research and global education standards. However, the transition has been anything but seamless.

Reality Check: A Disjointed Implementation

In much of India, children typically begin preschool around 3 or 3.5 years old, meaning they are ready for Grade 1 at 5 or 5.5 years old. The new NEP age criteria for Grade 1 introduce a delay, disrupting long-standing timelines for school admission policy in India.

To address this, states like Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Tamil Nadu have introduced NEP 2020 age relaxation policies, allowing admissions at 5.5 years. While well-intentioned, this state-by-state variability creates school confusion and anxiety for parents.

Ms. Shanti Priya explains,

“When policies differ from state to state, children and parents suffer the consequences. Families relocating may suddenly find their child either overage or underage. This inconsistency undermines both learning continuity and trust.”

Challenges in Policy Uniformity

The core problem lies in the fragmentation of NEP policy implementation. While the NEP’s aims are commendable, a lack of coordinated execution between the center and states has led to conflicting school admission age rules, particularly across CBSE and ICSE boards.

Some private and CBSE-affiliated schools adhere strictly to the 6-year rule, while others continue with the older model. This leaves parents confused and children caught in the crossfire of educational uncertainty.

Ms. Shanti Priya advocates for a balanced NEP rollout:

“There has to be space for contextual flexibility, but not at the cost of long-term coherence.”

Recommendations for a Balanced Approach

To bridge the gap between NEP vision and classroom reality, Ms. Shanti Priya proposes the following:

1. Phased Implementation

Roll out the 6-year age norm over 3–5 years, allowing preschools and private schools to adjust gradually.

2. Parental Awareness Programs

Launch nationwide campaigns to explain the benefits of ECCE, preschool-to-Grade 1 transitions, and why 6 is the right age.

3. Flexible Transition Guidelines

In the interim, admissions for children between 5.5 and 6 years should be allowed, with transparent policies about full adoption timelines.

4. Inter-State Coordination

Develop a national NEP framework with age uniformity, allowing state-specific adaptations rooted in demographic and cultural realities.

5. Strengthen ECCE Infrastructure

Ensure universal access to high-quality Early Childhood Care and Education, making the 6-year cutoff meaningful and fair.

Education as an Evolving Practice

Quoting John Dewey, Ms. Shanti Priya affirms:

“If we teach today’s students as we taught yesterday’s, we rob them of tomorrow.”

She argues that while NEP 2020 is rooted in evidence, its success hinges on responsive implementation. Child development NEP India guidelines can’t thrive without the infrastructure, awareness, and adaptability required to back them.

This is especially vital in a country as diverse as India, where early education structures vary drastically across rural and urban settings. A one-size-fits-all policy risks alienating those it intends to uplift.

Conclusion: Aligning Vision with Ground Reality

The debate around Grade 1 eligibility in 2025 exemplifies a broader challenge in Indian education—aligning progressive national reforms with on-the-ground practices. As Ms. Mary Shanti Priya emphasizes, success lies not in strict enforcement but in thoughtful transformation that supports every child’s learning journey.

By fostering dialogue among stakeholders, enabling transitional flexibility, and staying rooted in child-centered principles, India can fulfill the potential of NEP 2020 without compromising consistency.

Ultimately, the success of education policy depends not just on what it changes but also on how it listens, adapts, and includes.