NEP‑2020 AND EMPLOYABILITY: A DATA‑DRIVEN ASSESSMENT OF POSTGRADUATE STUDENT PERCEPTIONS IN HYDERABAD UNIVERSITIES

1. Introduction

The National Education Policy (NEP‑2020) represents one of the most ambitious reforms in India’s educational history, aiming to restructure the entire system from school to higher education (Sharma Gupta, 2022). It emphasizes multidisciplinary learning, flexibility, and skill integration, reflecting India’s aspiration to align with global standards of knowledge production and employability (Patel, 2023). Higher education institutions are expected to move beyond rote learning and disciplinary silos, instead fostering creativity, innovation, and critical thinking (Desai, 2023).

In the Indian context, employability has long been a challenge, with graduates often struggling to match industry expectations (Joshi, 2021). NEP‑2020 attempts to bridge this gap by introducing vocational training, internships, and flexible curricula (Khan, 2022). Hyderabad, with its premier universities such as Osmania University and the University of Hyderabad, provides a fertile ground to examine how these reforms are perceived by postgraduate students (Narayan, 2022). These institutions are not only academic centres but also hubs of socio‑economic mobility, making them critical sites for evaluating the education‑employment nexus (Mukherjee, 2021).

The policy’s holistic vision is commendable, but its implementation raises questions about inclusivity, equity, and alignment with labour market realities (Brown Hesketh, 2004). While students welcome the emphasis on skill development and innovation, concerns persist regarding unequal access, infrastructural limitations, and the risk of commodifying education (Singh A, 2022). Thus, the study situates NEP‑2020 within broader debates on globalization, capitalism, and social justice, highlighting both opportunities and challenges (Desai, 2023).

1.1. Employability as a Policy Priority

Employability has become a central theme in global education policy, reflecting the growing demand for graduates who can adapt to rapidly changing labour markets (Knight Yorke, 2003). In India, the employability discourse is particularly urgent, given the mismatch between academic curricula and industry requirements (Joshi, 2021). NEP‑2020 explicitly addresses this by integrating vocational education, internships, and skill‑based learning into higher education (Khan, 2022).

For postgraduate students, employability is not merely about securing jobs but about achieving meaningful careers that combine knowledge, skills, and innovation (Gupta2020). The policy’s emphasis on multidisciplinary learning and flexibility is designed to prepare students for diverse career paths, including research, entrepreneurship, and industry roles (Narayan, 2022). However, the success of this agenda depends on effective collaboration between universities and industries, as well as equitable access to opportunities (Mukherjee, 2021).

Hyderabad provides a unique context for examining employability, as it is both an academic hub and a major IT and industrial centre (Narayan, 2022). The city’s universities attract students from across India, making them ideal sites for studying perceptions of NEP‑2020’s employability agenda (Desai, 2023). By analysing student responses, this study contributes to understanding how policy reforms translate into lived experiences and career aspirations (Singh P, 2022).

1.2. Policy Reform and Global Capitalism

Education reforms such as NEP‑2020 cannot be understood in isolation; they are embedded in the dynamics of global capitalism and neoliberal governance (Carnoy, 2000). The policy reflects India’s attempt to align with international standards, promoting innovation, entrepreneurship, and global competitiveness (Tilak, 2020). Yet, the commodification of education raises concerns about inclusivity and social justice, as market‑driven reforms often privilege elite institutions and students (Singh P, 2022).

The employability discourse, while necessary, risks reducing education to a mere instrument of labour market needs (Bourdieu, 1986). Students in Hyderabad express both optimism and scepticism: while many acknowledge NEP‑2020’s potential to enhance skills and innovation, others worry about unequal access, industry misalignment, and the neglect of social justice concerns (Rao, 2021).

This tension between policy ideals and practical realities underscores the need for continuous monitoring and evaluation of NEP‑2020’s implementation (Patel, 2023). By situating the study within broader debates on globalization and capitalism, the research highlights the importance of balancing employability with equity and inclusivity (Mukherjee, 2021).

1.3. Rationale for the Study

The rationale for this study lies in its empirical contribution to policy debates on education and employability. By analysing data from 384 postgraduate students across Osmania University and the University of Hyderabad, the research provides insights into how NEP‑2020 is perceived at the ground level (Kumar, 2021). The study’s focus on student perceptions is significant because policies often fail when they do not resonate with stakeholders (Brown Hesketh, 2004).

The findings will inform policymakers, educators, and industry leaders about the strengths and weaknesses of NEP‑2020’s employability agenda (Narayan, 2022). Recommendations include enhancing industry partnerships, ensuring equitable access, and continuous monitoring of policy implementation (Tilak, 2020). The study also contributes to academic debates on the education‑employment nexus, situating NEP‑2020 within broader discussions on globalization, capitalism, and social justice (Carnoy, 2000).

By providing empirical evidence from Hyderabad, the research underscores the evolving relationship between education and employment in India. It highlights both opportunities and challenges, offering a balanced perspective that can guide future reforms (Sharma Gupta, 2022).

2. Objectives of the Study

The primary objective of this research is to critically assess the impact of the National Education Policy (NEP‑2020) on employability among postgraduate students in Hyderabad, focusing specifically on Osmania University and the University of Hyderabad. The study aims to evaluate how students perceive the reforms introduced under NEP‑2020, whether they believe these reforms enhance their career prospects, and to what extent the policy aligns with industry requirements and global labour market trends (Kumar, 2021). Employability, in this context, is understood not only as the ability to secure immediate employment but also as the broader capacity of graduates to innovate, adapt, and sustain meaningful careers in diverse sectors (Bhattacharya, 2021). The study further seeks to analyse student perceptions of NEP‑2020’s emphasis on multidisciplinary learning, skill integration, and flexibility, while also examining the challenges of practical implementation such as infrastructural limitations, equity concerns, and the risk of commodifying education (Mukherjee, 2021). By situating the research within the education‑employment nexus, the objectives are designed to generate empirical evidence that can inform both academic debates and policy decisions, thereby contributing to the broader discourse on education reform and social justice (Tilak, 2020).

2.1. Significance of the Study

The significance of this study lies in its potential to provide actionable insights into how NEP‑2020 is being received and experienced by postgraduate students, who represent the immediate beneficiaries of policy reforms. While NEP‑2020 is ambitious in scope, its success depends on how well it resonates with stakeholders, particularly students who are directly affected by its provisions (Brown Hesketh, 2004). By focusing on postgraduate students in Hyderabad, the research captures perspectives from institutions that are both academically prestigious and socially diverse, making the findings relevant not only for Telangana but also for broader national debates on education reform (Bhardwaj, 2021). The study’s significance also lies in its ability to highlight the challenges of aligning curricula with industry needs while ensuring equity and accessibility (Singh P, 2022). The findings are expected to provide recommendations for policymakers, educators, and industry leaders, including strengthening industry partnerships, enhancing skill‑based learning, and ensuring continuous monitoring of policy outcomes (Desai, 2023). Ultimately, the significance of the study converges on the recognition that education reforms must balance employability with social justice, preparing students not only for the labour market but also for active participation in a rapidly globalizing society (Carnoy, 2000).

3. Materials and Methods

The present study adopted a descriptive research design, which is widely used in social science research to systematically describe phenomena and analyse relationships between variables (Creswell, 2018). A descriptive design was considered appropriate because the study aimed to capture postgraduate students’ perceptions of NEP‑2020 and its impact on employability, rather than manipulating variables or conducting experimental interventions. This design allowed for the collection of quantitative data that could be statistically analysed to reveal patterns, associations, and differences across groups (Sharma Gupta, 2022).

The study area comprised two major universities in Hyderabad, Telangana—Osmania University and the University of Hyderabad. These institutions were selected because of their academic prestige, diversity of student populations, and relevance to the implementation of NEP‑2020 reforms (Basu, 2020). A total sample of 384 postgraduate students was drawn, with 192 respondents from each university. The respondents belonged to the 2022–2025 batches, ensuring that they were directly exposed to the policy reforms during their academic tenure.

The sampling technique employed was simple stratified random sampling, which ensured that students from different disciplines and backgrounds were proportionally represented (Kothari, 2004). Stratification was necessary to avoid bias and to capture the diversity of perceptions across faculties. The sample size of 384 was determined based on statistical adequacy for chi‑square and ANOVA tests, providing sufficient power for meaningful analysis (Tabachnick Fidell, 2019).

Data were collected using a structured questionnaire administered through Google Forms. The questionnaire included demographic details and ten Likert‑scale statements designed to measure perceptions of NEP‑2020’s impact on employability. Likert scales are widely recognized for capturing attitudinal data, allowing respondents to express degrees of agreement or disagreement (Likert, 1932), (Boone Boone, 2012). The instrument was pre‑tested to ensure clarity and reliability before full deployment.

The collected data were cleaned, tabulated, and imported into SPSS for statistical analysis. Descriptive statistics such as mean, standard deviation, and percentage were computed to summarize responses. Inferential tests included the chi‑square test to examine associations between categorical variables and the ANOVA test to compare mean differences across groups (Gravetter Wallnau, 2017). These methods provided robust insights into student perceptions and their relationship with demographic and institutional factors. By employing a rigorous design, representative sampling, and validated tools, the study ensured methodological reliability and validity. The materials and methods thus provide a strong foundation for interpreting the results and situating them within broader policy debates (Neuman, 2014).

4. Results

4.1. Descriptive Statistics from Likert Scale

TThe questionnaire included 10 statements measuring student perceptions of NEP‑2020’s impact on employability. Responses were recorded on a 5‑point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree). The following table summarizes the mean, standard deviation, and percentage agreement across the 384 respondents.

The descriptive statistics reveal that students generally perceive NEP‑2020 positively, particularly in terms of multidisciplinary learning (M = 4.12, 82% agreement) and flexibility in learning (M = 4.15, 83% agreement). These findings suggest that the reforms resonate with students’ desire for broader academic exposure and adaptable curricula (Banerjee, 2022). Similarly, high agreement levels for skill integration and innovation indicate that students recognize NEP‑2020’s potential to enhance employability through practical competencies (Knight Yorke, 2003).

However, concerns emerge regarding equitable access (M = 3.42, 61% agreement) and practical implementation (M = 3.36, 58% agreement). These lower scores highlight scepticism about whether reforms will be uniformly applied across institutions and whether infrastructural limitations may hinder success (Agarwal, 2020). The moderate agreement on industry alignment (M = 3.65, 68% agreement) further underscores the gap between academic reforms and labour market realities (Narayan, 2022). The Likert scale analysis demonstrates optimism about NEP‑2020’s vision but also reveals critical concerns about equity and feasibility. These findings provide a foundation for deeper statistical analysis using chi‑square and ANOVA tests.

4.2. Chi‑Square Test Results

To examine associations between demographic variables (e.g., university, gender, discipline) and perceptions of NEP‑2020, chi‑square tests were conducted.

The chi‑square analysis reveals significant associations between institutional affiliation and perceptions of employability. Students from the University of Hyderabad reported stronger agreement that NEP‑2020 enhances employability compared to those from Osmania University (χ² = 6.84, p < 0.01). This suggests that institutional context influences how reforms are experienced, possibly due to differences in infrastructure, faculty training, or industry linkages (Narayan, 2022).

Gender differences were also evident, with female students more likely to agree that NEP‑2020 ensures equitable access (χ² = 4.27, p < 0.05). This finding highlights the importance of gender perspectives in evaluating policy reforms, as women may perceive greater opportunities for inclusion under NEP‑2020 (Singh A, 2022).

Disciplinary differences emerged in perceptions of industry alignment, with science students more likely to agree that NEP‑2020 aligns with labour market needs (χ² = 8.12, p < 0.01). This reflects the stronger vocational orientation of science disciplines compared to social sciences, where alignment with industry is less direct (Mehrotra, 2014).

No significant differences were found in perceptions of practical implementation across universities (χ² = 2.15, p > 0.05), suggesting that skepticism about feasibility is widespread and not limited to specific institutions.

4.3. ANOVA Test Results

ANOVA was conducted to compare mean differences in perceptions across universities and disciplines.

The ANOVA results confirm that perceptions of employability differ significantly between universities (F = 4.62, p < 0.05). Students from the University of Hyderabad reported higher mean scores, reflecting stronger confidence in NEP‑2020’s employability agenda. This may be attributed to the university’s greater exposure to industry collaborations and research opportunities (Reddy, 2020).

Disciplinary differences were also significant in perceptions of industry alignment (F = 6.15, p < 0.05). Science students reported higher mean scores, consistent with the chi‑square findings. This underscores the need for NEP‑2020 to strengthen industry linkages in social sciences, where employability pathways are less structured (Tilak, 2020).

Gender differences were evident in perceptions of equitable access (F = 3.94, p < 0.05), with female students reporting higher agreement. This suggests that NEP‑2020 may be perceived as more inclusive by women, though further research is needed to confirm whether these perceptions translate into actual outcomes (Sharma Gupta, 2022).

No significant differences were found in perceptions of innovation across universities (F = 1.28, p > 0.05), indicating that students generally agree on NEP‑2020’s potential to foster creativity regardless of institutional context.

4.4. Synthesis of Results

The combined findings from the descriptive statistics, chi‑square tests, and ANOVA analyses provide a nuanced and multidimensional picture of how postgraduate students in Hyderabad perceive NEP‑2020 and its employability agenda. The descriptive results showed strong optimism regarding multidisciplinary learning, flexibility, and innovation, with mean scores above 4.0 and agreement levels exceeding 80 percent (Das, 2020). These findings suggest that students resonate with the policy’s vision of breaking disciplinary silos and creating adaptable curricula that prepare them for diverse career paths (Chatterjee, 2022). The emphasis on skill integration and creativity was also welcomed, reflecting students’ recognition that employability in the twenty‑first century requires more than academic knowledge—it demands practical competencies, problem‑solving abilities, and innovative thinking ( Zia, 2021).

At the same time, the results highlighted areas of concern. Lower agreement scores for equitable access (61 percent) and practical implementation (58 percent) reveal scepticism about whether NEP‑2020 will be uniformly applied across institutions and whether infrastructural limitations may hinder its success (Mukherjee, 2021). This scepticism was reinforced by chi‑square and ANOVA findings, which showed significant differences across universities, disciplines, and gender. Students from the University of Hyderabad expressed stronger confidence in NEP‑2020’s employability potential compared to those from Osmania University, suggesting that institutional context—such as faculty training, infrastructure, and industry linkages—plays a critical role in shaping perceptions (Zaveri, 2022).

Disciplinary differences were also evident, with science students reporting higher agreement that NEP‑2020 aligns with industry requirements. This reflects the stronger vocational orientation of science disciplines, where employability pathways are more structured and industry collaborations more frequent (Singh P, 2022). In contrast, social science students expressed greater scepticism, underscoring the need for NEP‑2020 to strengthen industry linkages in fields where employability is less direct (Chakraborty, 2020). Gender differences further enriched the analysis, with female students more likely to perceive NEP‑2020 as ensuring equitable access. This finding suggests that women may view the reforms as creating new opportunities for inclusion, though further research is needed to determine whether these perceptions translate into actual outcomes (Yadav R, 2021).

Taken together, the results suggest that NEP‑2020 has the potential to enhance employability but requires stronger industry partnerships, infrastructural support, and mechanisms to ensure equity. The optimism expressed by students regarding flexibility and innovation must be balanced against concerns about feasibility and inclusivity. The findings also highlight the importance of context‑sensitive implementation, as institutional, disciplinary, and gender differences shape how reforms are experienced (Field, 2013).

In broader terms, the study situates NEP‑2020 within debates on globalization, social justice, and the commodification of education. While the policy reflects India’s ambition to align with international standards and promote global competitiveness, its success will depend on whether it can balance market demands with equity and inclusivity (Carnoy, 2000). The results underscore the evolving education‑employment nexus in India, offering empirical evidence that can inform policymakers, educators, and industry leaders (Saxena, 2022). By highlighting both opportunities and challenges, the study contributes to ongoing debates on how education reforms can be strengthened to ensure meaningful employment outcomes for all students (Vyas, 2022).

5. Discussion

5.1 Linking Findings to Policy Reform

The results of this study highlight a strong sense of optimism among postgraduate students regarding NEP‑2020’s emphasis on multidisciplinary learning, flexibility, and innovation. These perceptions align with global trends in higher education reform, where adaptability and cross‑disciplinary exposure are increasingly valued(Altbach, 2015), (Marginson, 2019). The high levels of agreement on these dimensions suggest that students recognize the potential of NEP‑2020 to prepare them for diverse career trajectories (Das, 2020). However, the relatively lower scores for equitable access and practical implementation reveal a gap between policy ideals and lived realities (Prakash, 2021). This tension reflects broader critiques of education reforms that prioritize vision statements without adequately addressing infrastructural and social constraints (Verma, 2021).

5.2. Employability and Industry Alignment

Employability emerged as a central theme in student perceptions, with most respondents acknowledging NEP‑2020’s potential to enhance career opportunities (Pandey, 2020). Yet, the moderate agreement on industry alignment underscores the persistent challenge of bridging academia and labour markets. Similar findings have been reported in studies of higher education reforms in other countries, where employability initiatives often falter due to weak industry partnerships (Gopal, 2022).In Hyderabad, the disciplinary differences revealed by ANOVA—where science students expressed stronger confidence in industry alignment compared to social science students—highlight the unevenness of employability pathways  (Prasad, 2022). This suggests that while NEP‑2020 may succeed in technical fields, it requires additional mechanisms to support employability in disciplines where career trajectories are less structured (Thomas J, 2020).

5.3 Equity and Inclusivity Concerns

One of the most critical findings of this study is the scepticism surrounding equitable access. Although female students expressed greater confidence in NEP‑2020’s inclusivity, overall agreement levels were modest(Subramanian, 2021). This reflects broader concerns that reforms often privilege elite institutions and urban students, leaving marginalized groups behind (Srinivasan, 2020). Equity in higher education is not merely about access but also about ensuring that students from diverse backgrounds can benefit equally from reforms (Gupta2020). Without targeted interventions—such as scholarships, infrastructural investments, and inclusive curricula—NEP‑2020 risks reproducing existing inequalities rather than dismantling them (Sharma Gupta, 2022).

5.4. Institutional Context and Implementation

The chi‑square and ANOVA results revealed significant differences between Osmania University and the University of Hyderabad, with the latter showing stronger confidence in NEP‑2020’s employability agenda. This finding underscores the importance of institutional context in shaping student experiences. Universities with better infrastructure, faculty training, and industry collaborations are more likely to successfully implement reforms (Sen, 2020). Conversely, institutions with limited resources may struggle, leading to uneven outcomes across the higher education system (Nanda, 2022). This raises important questions about how NEP‑2020 can be implemented in a way that ensures consistency and fairness across diverse institutions (Saxena, 2022).

5.5. Recommendations for Strengthening NEP‑2020

Based on the findings, several recommendations can be made to strengthen NEP‑2020’s employability agenda. First, universities must establish stronger partnerships with industries to ensure that curricula are aligned with labour market needs (Iyer, 2021). This could involve internships, collaborative research projects, and industry‑led workshops (Patel, 2023). Second, equity must be prioritized through targeted support for marginalized students, including financial aid, mentorship programs, and infrastructural investments (Mukherjee, 2021). Third, continuous monitoring and evaluation mechanisms should be established to assess the effectiveness of reforms and make necessary adjustments (Anderson, 2019). Finally, reforms must balance employability with holistic development, ensuring that students are prepared not only for the labour market but also for active participation in society (Saha, 2021).

5.6. Broader Implications for Policy and Research

The findings of this study contribute to broader debates on education reform in India and beyond. They highlight the importance of empirical research in evaluating policy outcomes, moving beyond abstract discussions to capture lived experiences (Roy, 2021), By focusing on postgraduate students in Hyderabad, the study provides insights into how reforms are perceived in urban, diverse, and academically prestigious contexts (Mishra, 2020). Future research could extend this analysis to other regions and institutions, providing a more comprehensive picture of NEP‑2020’s impact (Raman, 2020).

Moreover, the study underscores the need for interdisciplinary approaches to education reform. Employability cannot be understood solely in economic terms; it must also be situated within social, cultural, and political contexts (Rajan, 2022). Policies that prioritize market demands without addressing equity and inclusivity risk undermining the broader goals of education (Menon, 2022). Thus, NEP‑2020 must be seen not only as a reform for employability but also as a reform for social justice and national development  (Jain, 2022).

Conclusion

The present study has provided an empirical assessment of the National Education Policy (NEP‑2020) and its impact on employability among postgraduate students in Hyderabad. Drawing on data from 384 respondents across Osmania University and the University of Hyderabad, the findings reveal a complex interplay of optimism and scepticism. Students strongly welcomed the policy’s emphasis on multidisciplinary learning, flexibility, and innovation, recognizing these as essential attributes for navigating contemporary labour markets (Sharma Gupta, 2022). At the same time, concerns about equitable access, industry alignment, and practical implementation underscore the challenges of translating policy vision into lived realities (Mukherjee, 2021).

The statistical analyses—descriptive, chi‑square, and ANOVA—demonstrated significant differences across institutions, disciplines, and gender, highlighting the diverse ways in which reforms are experienced (Marginson, 2019). These variations emphasize the importance of context‑sensitive implementation, as institutional resources, disciplinary orientations, and social identities shape perceptions of employability (Narayan, 2022). The findings suggest that while NEP‑2020 has the potential to enhance employability, its success depends on strengthening industry partnerships, ensuring infrastructural support, and prioritizing equity (Kapoor, 2021).

From a broader perspective, the study situates NEP‑2020 within debates on globalization, social justice, and the commodification of education. The policy reflects India’s ambition to align with international standards and promote global competitiveness, but its sustainability will depend on balancing market demands with inclusivity and fairness (Anand, 2021). By providing empirical evidence from Hyderabad, the research contributes to national and international discussions on education reform, offering insights that can guide policymakers, educators, and industry leaders.

In conclusion, NEP‑2020 represents a significant step toward reshaping India’s higher education landscape, but its promise will only be realized through careful, equitable, and context‑sensitive implementation. The study underscores the evolving education‑employment nexus, highlighting both opportunities and challenges. Future research should extend this analysis to other regions and institutions, providing a more comprehensive understanding of NEP‑2020’s impact (Lal, 2020). Ultimately, education reforms must prepare students not only for the labour market but also for active participation in society (Kaur, 2021), ensuring that employability is pursued alongside equity, inclusivity, and social justice.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest in relation to the present study. All data were collected and analysed independently, and no external influence or bias affected the research process or its outcomes.

Funding Acknowledgement

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not‑for‑profit sectors. The study was conducted with the academic support of Osmania University and the University of Hyderabad, which provided access to respondents and institutional resources.

Acknowledgement

The authors gratefully acknowledge the cooperation of postgraduate students from Osmania University and the University of Hyderabad who participated in this study. Their willingness to share perceptions and experiences made this research possible. The authors also extend appreciation to faculty colleagues for their guidance and encouragement during the data collection and analysis phases.

Authors’ Contribution

Kalakoti Uday Kumar and Medi Karthik contributed equally to this study. Both authors conceptualized the study, designed the methodology, and supervised the data collection and analysis. Medi Karthik contributed to the drafting of the manuscript, conducted the statistical analysis, and performed the literature review. Both authors jointly interpreted the findings, prepared the final draft, and approved the manuscript for submission.

References