Skill-Based Curriculum in Nepal: Policy and Practice
Over my two-decade-long educational journey, I have seen many experiments in Nepal’s education system. From the New Education Plan 2028 BS to the National Curriculum Framework 2076, we have made many leaps on paper. Yet even today, when I look into the eyes of young people standing outside the gate of Tribhuvan University or in the queue at the Department of Passports, one question pierces me: “Has our education actually taught them survival skills?”
In the twenty-first century, the definition of literacy has changed. Education is no longer just the ability to read and write; real education is the ability to apply what has been learned in practice and to use it to earn an income or solve problems. In this context, there has been intense discussion in Nepal about a skill-based curriculum. But has this discussion reached the classroom, or is it confined to the seminar halls of policymakers?
This article will factually analyse the current status of the skill-based curriculum in Nepal, its structural flaws, the challenges of implementation, and practical measures for solutions.
What Is a Skill-Based Curriculum? (Philosophy and Practice)
First, we should not understand “skill” in a narrow sense. Many people think skill means only plumbing, wiring or sewing and knitting. However, according to modern curricula, skills need to be understood at three levels:
-
Foundational skills (Foundational Skills): literacy and numeracy.
-
Technical/vocational skills (Technical/Vocational Skills): competencies required for a specific occupation (for example, coding, agriculture, engineering).
-
Life or soft skills (Life/Soft Skills): communication, leadership, creativity and critical awareness (critical thinking).
In the Nepali context, a skill-based curriculum refers to an educational document that moves students away from mere rote learning toward a learning-by-doing approach. Its purpose is to transform students from job seekers into job creators or, at the very least, self-reliant citizens.
Skills in Policy Documents: How Strong Are We on Paper?
As a researcher, I feel quite encouraged when I go through Nepal’s educational documents. At the policy level, we appear to be among the more progressive countries in South Asia.
a) National Curriculum Framework, 2076 (NCF 2076)
This is the “Magna Carta” of school education in Nepal. It divides school education into basic (grades 1–8) and secondary (grades 9–12) levels and introduces a single-track curriculum.
-
Change: It abolishes the traditional faculty-based system (Science/Management/Arts) in grades 11 and 12 and provides for subject-wise selection.
-
Position of skills: It places practical life and skills at the centre. An integrated curriculum has been implemented in grades 1–3, where mathematics, science and language are not taught separately but are linked to daily life activities.
-
Local curriculum: A 100-mark local subject has been made compulsory from grades 1 to 8. Its objective is to teach students about local occupations, enterprises and skills such as agriculture, handicrafts and tourism.
b) Compulsory Subject: Social Studies and Life Skills Education
In grades 11 and 12, Life Skills Education has been included as a compulsory subject. This was a groundbreaking step. The subject is envisaged to teach students digital literacy, email writing, stress management and research methods.
c) Expansion of Technical and Vocational Education (TEVT)
The government has introduced a policy of “one technical school in each local level.” The number of schools running short- and long-term training programmes under the Council for Technical Education and Vocational Training (CTEVT) and operating a technical stream in grades 9–12 is increasing.
Ground Reality: What Is Happening in the Classroom? (The Reality Check)
When the policies written in golden letters on paper enter through the classroom door, their colour begins to fade. My 30 years of experience and field research over the past five years reveal a rather alarming reality.
The Paradox of Life Skills Education
How is the subject Social Studies and Life Skills Education actually being taught in grades 11 and 12?
-
Problem: There are no trained teachers specifically prepared to teach this subject. It has simply been handed over to teachers who were previously teaching Social Education or History.
-
Result: Even matters such as how to write an email or how to manage stress are written on the board by the teacher and copied into exercise books by students. A subject meant for learning skills has been turned into another rote-learning subject.
In the examination, a question appears such as “Write five ways to manage stress,” and students reproduce memorised points. What is being tested here is not skills but memory.
Local Curriculum: Skills or Just History?
The local curriculum was intended to teach students local skills such as apple farming in Jumla, making juju dhau in Bhaktapur or producing earthen pots.
Reality: Most local governments were unable to develop such curricula. Those that did largely turned them into textbooks on district history and geography.
Instead of learning to go to the field and transplant paddy, students read in the book about which month paddy is transplanted. This 100-mark subject has become merely a way to add marks.
The Poor State of Computer and Science Laboratories
Infrastructure is indispensable for a skill-based approach.
According to government statistics, more than 50 percent of community schools still do not have a well-equipped science laboratory.
Computer Science is taught, but many schools either do not have electricity or the computers are out of order. Teachers are forced to draw a picture of a mouse on the blackboard and say, “This is called a mouse.”
It is like trying to teach swimming without a pool and merely demonstrating hand movements in the classroom; this is what our technical education has come to.
The Barrier of the Examination System
Our curriculum says, “Learn skills.” But our examinations (SEE/NEB) say, “How much have you memorised? Now reproduce it.”
-
No matter how well you have learned practical skills, in the end a three-hour written exam decides your fate.
-
Practical marks of 25 or 50 have been allocated, but the irony is that these marks lie entirely in the hands of the teacher, and there is a widespread practice of giving almost all students 24 or 25 out of 25 for free.
Students neither prepare files nor carry out projects nor demonstrate any skills. As a result, the very term “practical” has been devalued.
Higher Education and the Technical Stream (CTEVT): Where Is the Gap?
After completing school level, students go to universities or technical institutes to learn skills. What is the situation there?
a) CTEVT and Social Perceptions
In Nepal, the Council for Technical Education and Vocational Training (CTEVT) has played a major role in producing skilled human resources. However, there is a serious social issue here.
-
Second-class citizens: Society labels those who study at CTEVT as people who came there because they were weak in studies or had low grades in the SEE.
-
Lack of linkage: Those who receive plumbing or electrician training here do find work in the market, but they do not receive the same respect or opportunities for career growth as engineers.
In addition, there is a mismatch between the modern technologies demanded by industry (for example, smart home wiring) and the outdated wiring taught in CTEVT curricula.
b) Universities: Heavy on Theory
The semester system was introduced at Tribhuvan University and other universities with the objective of fostering research and skill development. In practice, however, this semester system has turned into a smaller version of the old annual system.
Example: Students who have completed BBS or MBA often cannot reconcile the balance sheet of a real company or file a tax return. Engineering students complete only one or two substantial projects in four years, and even those are often copied from seniors.
Factory of unemployment: Universities are not producing human resources; they are producing unemployed graduates. There is no dialogue between the curriculum and the labour market.
Industry needs people who know Python, while universities are still teaching Fortran.
Major Barriers to Skill Development (Critical Analysis)
Why are we failing? Looking at the roots, five main reasons emerge:
Teacher competency
This is where the biggest problem lies. Most of our teachers are trained in methods that are 20 years old. If they themselves do not understand project-based learning (PBL) or critical thinking, how can they teach these to students?
Training programmes (TPD) are conducted, but they often become mere platforms for collecting allowances. When teachers return to the classroom, they revert to the same old lecture method.
Political instability and policy fluctuations
Nepal’s education system suffers from the tendency to change policies every time a minister changes. Sometimes the SLC is removed, sometimes the SEE is introduced, sometimes mathematics is dropped, sometimes it is added again.
Such instability creates confusion in curriculum implementation.
Insufficient budget
Although there is an international commitment to allocate 20 percent of the total budget to education, we are barely around 10–11 percent. More than 80 percent of that goes to teachers’ salaries.
Schools are left with almost no funds to build laboratories, purchase materials or conduct research.
Lack of dignity of labour
Parents want to see their children become bank managers, not agricultural experts. As long as society does not respect work that leaves mud or grease on one’s hands, a skill-based curriculum cannot succeed.
Industry–academia disconnect
Industrialists are not invited when curricula are developed. As a result, what students study does not serve the market, and what the market needs is not taught in colleges.
Practical Measures for Solutions (Problem-Solving Approach)
It is not enough to merely list problems. As a specialist, I propose the following practical solutions, which can be implemented in both the short and long term:
a) Change Teaching Methods, Not Just the Curriculum
No matter how good the curriculum is, nothing changes if teaching methods remain the same.
Suggestion: Teacher training should be made classroom-based through school-based mentoring. Teachers should be trained to shift from lecturing to facilitation.
Teacher assessment: Promotion and evaluation of teachers should be based on how many skills they helped students acquire and how many projects they guided them through.
b) Fundamental Changes in Assessment
Suggestion: At grades 9–12 and university level, the weight of written examinations should be reduced to 50 percent, with the remaining 50 percent assigned to project work, internships and viva voce.
However, external examiners and representatives from the relevant industries must be involved in awarding these marks so that they are not distributed casually.
Standard test: A national-level skill test examination should be conducted, and its certificate should carry recognition equivalent to that of an academic certificate.
c) Model of Earning While Learning
-
Suggestion: From grade 9 onwards, students should be required to work as interns in local industries, garages, farms or offices for one day a week or during holidays.
This will give them exposure to real work. Local governments can coordinate this.
d) Public–Private Partnership (PPP)
Suggestion: The government alone cannot establish high-tech laboratories in all schools. Therefore, it should collaborate with the private sector.
For example, groups such as Chaudhary Group or Nepal Telecom could adopt selected schools and run technical training centres there.
e) Adopting the Dual VET System
A Dual VET system like that of Germany or Switzerland, where students spend three days in factories and two days at school, can be introduced immediately in urban areas of Nepal. CTEVT has begun piloting this model; it needs to be scaled up.
Conclusion
The state of the skill-based curriculum in Nepal is like being excellent in theory but disabled in practice. We have the roadmap, but neither the vehicle (infrastructure) nor the driver (teachers) is ready.
Teaching skills to students does not mean merely putting a certificate in their hands; it means placing in their hands the tools with which they can build their future. If we do not link the curriculum with the labour market now and cannot break the cycle of rote learning, the human resources we produce will be intellectually disabled individuals who possess knowledge but lack the capacity to use it.
The way forward is now clear: we must turn classrooms into workshops, transform teachers into facilitators and make examinations centres for testing skills. This is not easy, but it is not impossible. For this, political will, teachers’ commitment and a change in parents’ attitudes are all necessary.
My 30 years of experience tell me that Nepali students do not lack ability; what is lacking is the platform that can help their abilities blossom. A skill-based curriculum can become that platform if it is implemented with sincerity.
References
-
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (2076). National Curriculum Framework. Sanothimi, Bhaktapur.
-
Council for Technical Education and Vocational Training (CTEVT). Annual Reports (2079/80).
-
World Bank (2021). Nepal Education Sector Analysis.
-
Tribhuvan University, Planning Directorate statistics.
-
Constitution of Nepal (2072). Article 31 (Right to Education) and Article 33 (Right to Employment).
-
Articles and interviews by educationists such as Dr. Vidyanath Koirala and Dr. Man Prasad Wagle in various national daily newspapers published at different times.
