Current Status and Structural Transformation of Secondary Education in Nepal

 

Current Status and Structural Transformation of Secondary Education in Nepal

Bhagawat Dev Bhatt

Date: May 14, 2026 

Abstract

In the history of Nepal’s educational evolution, secondary education (Grades 9–12) is currently undergoing a critical transitional and transformative phase following the structural reorganization of school education. Since the eighth amendment of the Education Act (2016), which dissolved the erstwhile Higher Secondary Education Board (HSEB) and integrated it into the school system, the academic and managerial landscape has shifted significantly.

This article analyzes the current state of Grades 9–12, offering a comparative study between the former 'Plus Two' system and the current 'Integrated Secondary Education' model. Specifically, it exposes the discrepancies prevalent in private educational institutions, highlighting the gap between the enticing rhetoric of 'Quality Education' and the ground reality. The study critically examines the trend in many private institutions where teacher appointments are prioritized based on financial investment (shareholding) rather than pedagogical qualifications or academic expertise—a practice that raises serious questions regarding professional ethics in education. It further identifies the detrimental impact of underqualified shareholder-teachers on student learning outcomes and the increasing commercialization of education as primary challenges. Ultimately, this article advocates for policy-level discourse aimed at rigorous regulation of the private sector and genuine quality enhancement alongside structural transformation.

---

Keywords

• Secondary Education (9–12): The current integrated school structure of Nepal.

• Shareholder-Teachers: Personnel engaged in teaching based on financial investment rather than merit or professional qualification.

• Quality Education Rhetoric: The existing disparity between institutional branding/advertisement and academic reality.

• Structural Transformation: The legal and institutional transition from the HSEB framework to the comprehensive secondary level.

• Commercialization of Education: Profit-oriented investment and its profound implications on the academic sphere.    

1. Introduction

The form and structure of secondary education in Nepal have undergone significant evolution in response to changing historical contexts. Following the implementation of the National Education System Plan (NESP) in 1971 (2028 B.S.), a formal effort was initiated to organize Nepalese education into a systematic framework. During that era, Grades 8–10 were categorized as secondary education, while levels beyond Grade 10 were considered part of higher education. However, aligned with global practices and evolving demands, the Higher Secondary Education Council (HSEB) was established post-1989 (2046 B.S.), introducing Grades 11 and 12 as the ‘Plus Two’ system. For nearly two and a half decades, this level functioned as a "hybrid" structure—a bridge between university education and school schooling.

In the contemporary context, Article 31 of the Constitution of Nepal (2015) establishes education as a fundamental right, ensuring every citizen's right to free and compulsory education up to the secondary level. To institutionalize this constitutional mandate, the Eighth Amendment of the Education Act (2016) restructured school education into two distinct tiers: Basic Education (Grades 1–8) and Secondary Education (Grades 9–12). This legislative reform dissolved the erstwhile HSEB, replaced it with the National Examination Board (NEB), and integrated Grades 11–12 as an indispensable component of the school system.

Spanning from the 1971 education plan to the threshold of 2026 (2082 B.S.), secondary education in Nepal has transcended beyond basic literacy. In the spirit of federalism, it has been decentralized and brought under the jurisdiction of local governments. Furthermore, the National Curriculum Framework (2019) introduced a single-track curriculum for Grades 9–12, aiming to eliminate disciplinary silos (faculty-based discrimination). As we approach the 2025/2026 (2082/083) academic session, the state’s primary objective appears to be the implementation of "skill-based education"—an approach that aligns secondary schooling with life skills, technological proficiency, and the labor market. This transformation is not merely a legal shift; it is a long-term campaign intended to bring about radical reforms in curricular nature, pedagogical evaluation, and teacher management systems.

2. Current Situation and Legal Framework

Although the current structure of secondary education in Nepal appears transformative from a legal standpoint, the ground reality of its implementation is fraught with severe deviations and contradictions. On one hand, the state has established an administrative mechanism through the Center for Education and Human Resource Development (CEHRD) and an evaluative framework via the National Examination Board (NEB). On the other hand, the National Curriculum Framework (2019) claims to dismantle traditional faculty-based rigidity by providing students with academic autonomy through a "Single-Track" system. However, a profound chasm exists between this policy-level idealism and the practical shortcomings of its execution.

2.1. Grading System and the Devaluation of Examinations

While the government-mandated Letter Grading System was intended to measure student learning levels objectively, in practice, it has fostered a "No Fail" mentality, leading to a decline in academic standards. Paradoxically, the Grade 11 examination—once considered the heart of secondary education—has been relegated to a mere formality by the NEB, which handed over the evaluation responsibility entirely to individual schools. Consequently, the academic rigor of Grade 11 has been compromised, giving rise to a trend of arbitrary grading and inflated internal assessments.

2.2. The Facade of Entrance Examinations and the "Bridge Course" Scam

The entrance examinations conducted by private institutions for Grade 11 enrollment present another significant systemic challenge. These exams, ostensibly designed to identify meritorious students, have largely turned into tools for institutional branding and financial exploitation. This environment nurtured the "Bridge Course" industry, which trapped students and parents in a cycle of economic extortion for years. Although the current government has taken a bold step by banning these illegal operations, the continued existence of such activities in the absence of stringent monitoring highlights the state's administrative frailty.

2.3. Private Sector Autonomy and the Irony of "Shareholder-Teachers"

In many private schools where education is treated as a medium for profit maximization, the slogan of "Quality Education" remains limited to deceptive advertising. The trend of appointing teachers based on their equity (shareholding) in the institution rather than their academic credentials or pedagogical passion undermines the fundamental dignity of the profession. "Investor-teachers," who occupy classrooms through financial leverage despite lacking subject-matter expertise or instructional skills, are forcing highly qualified and meritorious professionals out of the sector.

2.4. Public School Indifference and the Shadow of Political Interference

Billions of dollars in state investment in public schools have largely failed to yield the desired outcomes. The practice of appointing teachers through "political quotas" and partisan recruitment—often under the guise of relief or contract quotas—has broken the backbone of public education. From school management committees to teacher unions, pervasive partisan politics has led to a peak in administrative apathy. As a result, students from marginalized backgrounds are being deprived of quality education and are increasingly becoming victims of a system that functions as a factory for producing "unemployed certificate holders."

3. Malpractice in Practical Assessments and the Absence of Monitoring

The most superficial and embarrassing aspect of Nepal’s secondary education evaluation system is the distribution of the 25-mark practical assessment. This internal score has become a tool of academic convenience rather than merit, lacking both academic weight and objective criteria.

3.1. The 'Gift' of Practical Marks and Academic Parody

Instead of assessing a student’s actual technical skills, subject teachers often distribute marks indiscriminately to maintain the institution's competitive "high-result" profile. It has become a tragic irony in the education sector that a student who struggles to secure a 'D' or 'E' grade in a theoretical exam frequently receives an 'A+' (25 out of 25) in practicals. Consequently, practical exams have ceased to be a measure of competence and have instead become a cheap tool for "beautifying marksheets." Furthermore, vesting this absolute power in teachers sometimes fosters a culture of sycophancy or creates undue psychological pressure on students.

3.2. The Fragility of the National Examination Board (NEB) and Lack of Oversight

The primary reason for this academic anarchy is the administrative weakness and total lack of monitoring by the National Examination Board (NEB). There is a conspicuous absence of the Board’s presence regarding the supervision of classroom teaching, internal evaluation, and the status of physical infrastructure in Grades 11 and 12. In the absence of oversight, public schools have turned into hubs for political activity, while private institutions treat the system as an unregulated "playground." The trend of private schools awarding free marks to attract students, coupled with the evasion of responsibility by public school teachers, has significantly eroded the prestige of the secondary level.

3.3. The Collective Exploitation by Private and Public Sectors

Without the threat of regulatory consequences, private schools have engaged in financial exploitation through admission and entrance fees, while public schools continue to mismanage state resources. The NEB has shrunk into a mere administrative office limited to "conducting exams and publishing results." The practice of awarding marks within the confines of an office—without any actual laboratory work or fieldwork—has made a mockery of technical and scientific education. This situation has relegated the national commitment to "Quality Education" to a mere paper-based aspiration.

4. Assault on Examination Integrity: 'Center Setting' and the Result Trade

Another alarming and unethical practice prevalent among some private schools in Nepal’s secondary education sector is the manipulation of Grade 12 examination centers, commonly known as "Exam Center Setting." Schools often utilize this as a primary "Marketing Tool" to entice parents and students who have completed their SEE and are aspiring for higher education.

4.1. The Illusion of Security and the Reality of Collusion

During the admission season, several private school operators assure parents that enrolling in their institution guarantees a "favorable" examination center where arrangements will be made for easy scoring. This malicious intent—to allow cheating within the exam hall, influence invigilators, and secure a hundred percent pass rate—devalues the hard work of meritorious students. This "guarantee of success" is not a reflection of educational quality but is, in fact, a brutal assault on the confidentiality and sanctity of the examination process.

4.2. Commercial Competition and Unethical Guarantees

The aggressive competition for "top results" among private schools has contaminated the entire examination framework. Instead of focusing on learning, students are often taught "tactics to pass." Reports of collusion between school administrations, center superintendents, and government mechanisms—extending even to the manipulation of answer scripts—have dragged the academic reputation of the country to its lowest point. When an institution prioritizes "setting" over "learning," it ceases to produce capable leaders and instead generates a crowd of unskilled individuals who merely hold certificates.

4.3. Questions Regarding the Role of the National Examination Board (NEB)

The National Examination Board (NEB), which is mandated to designate examination centers and ensure their impartiality, often appears indifferent or silent regarding these allegations of collusion. Financial irregularities and political influence in the determination of centers have raised significant questions about the Board's credibility. If this "black market" of center manipulation and result trading is not immediately dismantled, the international recognition and validity of Nepal’s academic credentials could face a severe crisis.

5. Comparative Analysis

The evolution of secondary education in Nepal presents a compelling yet contradictory journey, moving from the University-led Proficiency Certificate Level (PCL) to the autonomous Higher Secondary Education Council (HSEB), and finally to the current Integrated School System (NEB). The following table and analysis summarize this historical and academic transition:

Table: A Tripartite Comparison of Nepal’s Secondary Education

Basis of Comparison	University Level (PCL) - Former	Higher Secondary (HSEB) - Former	Secondary Education (NEB) - Current
Regulatory Body	Tribhuvan University (TU)	Higher Secondary Education Council	National Examination Board (NEB)
Academic Identity	First step of Higher Education (University Product)	A 'Bridge' between School and University	Terminal stage of School Education
Curricular Framework	Intensive and Academic Rigor	Faculty-based (Science, Mgmt, Arts)	Single-Track and Life-skills oriented
Examination System	Annual Exams (Traditional 3-hour format)	Annual and Rigid Board Examinations	Mixed (75% Written + 25% Practical)
Evaluation Method	Percentage / Division System	Percentage (Pass/Fail)	Letter Grading System
Internal/Practical (25)	Limited to Science and specific technical subjects	Moderate seriousness in practical exercises	25 marks in all subjects (often lack objective weight)
Exam Centers	Strict discipline and high integrity	Relatively flexible but competitive	Trend of 'Setting' and commercial competition

5. Deep Dive into Comparative Analysis

5.1. From Academic Legacy to School Integration

Until the late 2000s, the Proficiency Certificate Level (PCL) under Tribhuvan University was regarded as the gold standard of academic excellence in Nepal. Completing PCL was seen as achieving half a university degree. While the emergence of the HSEB decentralized education, it simultaneously eroded that "academic rigor." Under the current NEB structure, the system has become entirely school-centric; while this has increased access, it has significantly weakened the foundational strength required for higher education.

5.2. The Parody of Evaluation: Grading vs. Percentage

In the previous system, every single mark held immense value, and the fear of failure instilled a sense of diligence in students. The current Letter Grading System has reduced student stress but has also extinguished the hunger for learning. Specifically, the 25-mark practical assessment has devolved into a "free gift" distributed by schools to their favored students. A student securing a 'D' in written exams but an 'A+' in practicals mocks the very essence of assessment. This ineffective practical scoring teaches students to beg for marks rather than acquire actual skills.

5.3. The End of Faculties and 'Single-Track' Ambiguity

During the HSEB era, students chose 'Science' or 'Management' with a clear career trajectory. However, the current Single-Track Curriculum has simplified subject selection at the cost of professional clarity. The lack of alignment with university curricula has led students to view migration abroad after Grade 12 as their only viable option.

5.4. Absence of Supervision and the Rise of 'Collusion'

The impenetrable security of university exams and the discipline of the early HSEB days are now relics of the past. Today, "exam center setting" and unethical guarantees of "100% success" by private schools have transformed the education system into a commercial syndicate. The Board has been reduced to a result-printing machine, while schools prioritize business survival over academic integrity by facilitating cheating.

---

6. Multi-dimensional Challenges: A SMART Analysis

Although Grades 9–12 are structurally integrated, the implementation remains fragile. The following challenges are presented not just as problems, but as time-bound mandates:

A) Specific Challenges

• Displacing Investor-Teachers: Replacing "shareholder-teachers" in private schools—who often lack academic credentials or teaching licenses—with qualified academic professionals.

• Revising Practical Marks: Transforming the 25-mark practical from a "gift" into a rigorous Practical Portfolio system, requiring the mandatory presence of external examiners.

• Purifying Examination Centers: Banning the unethical trade of "center setting" and "100% result" advertisements to restore the sanctity of examinations.

B) Measurable Goals

• Teacher Quota Alignment: Reducing the 80% vacancy rate for subject-specific teachers in public schools to below 50% within two academic sessions.

• Reliability of Results: Balancing internal and external evaluations to eliminate the disproportionate ratio of students receiving 'A+' in practicals and 'D' in theory.

C) Approachable and Realistic Methodology

• Ending the 'Plus Two' Mentality: Integrating Grades 9–12 administratively and academically within the same school premises and eliminating the hierarchy between secondary and higher-secondary teachers.

• Regulating Bridge Courses: Utilizing local government monitoring to curb the financial exploitation occurring under the guise of entrance preparation.

D) Realistic Investment

• Strengthening Technical Education: Providing adequate laboratories and internships to link education with labor, moving beyond nominal technical schools. Ensuring academic autonomy by removing private-sector profit motives and public-sector political interference.

E) Time-bound Action Plan

• By the end of 2026 (2082 B.S.): Enacting the Federal Education Act to clarify the jurisdictions of local, provincial, and federal governments.

• By the 2026/27 Session (2083 B.S.): Standardizing Grade 11 examinations to match the national criteria of Grade 12, making schools accountable for internal assessments.

---

Conclusion

While integrating Nepal's secondary education (9–12) is a progressive step aligned with international standards, its success is hindered by a lack of policy clarity and practical integrity. The vacuum created by discarding the discipline of the 1971 National Education Plan and the academic legacy of the PCL has left the current system directionless. Academic corruption fueled by the 25-mark practical "bribe," the anomaly of "shareholder-teachers" in private sectors, and "political quotas" in public schools have dragged educational dignity to its lowest point.

Transformation must be SMART-based. By the 2026/2083 session, the state must uproot unethical commercial syndicates involved in "center setting." Government efforts to control "Bridge Course" scams must be fortified with stringent monitoring. The primary needs today are infrastructure development, professional capacity building for teachers, and a technical framework that links education with labor. Ultimately, until schools are liberated from the shadows of "profit-driven business clubs" and "political recruitment centers," Nepal’s secondary education will fail to produce a workforce capable of competing in the global market.

References

• Curriculum Development Centre. (2019). National Curriculum Framework (9-12). Sanothimi, Bhaktapur: Ministry of Education, Science and Technology.

• Education and Human Resource Development Centre. (2024). Educational Statistics Report of School Education. Sanothimi, Bhaktapur: Government of Nepal.

• Government of Nepal. (1971). National Education System Plan (2028–2032). Kathmandu: Ministry of Education.

• Government of Nepal. (2015). Constitution of Nepal. Kathmandu: Law Books Management Committee.

• Government of Nepal. (2016). Education Act (Eighth Amendment). Kathmandu: Law Books Management Committee.

• Government of Nepal. (2017). Local Government Operation Act, 2074. Kathmandu: Law Books Management Committee.

• Government of Nepal. (2018). Compulsory and Free Education Act, 2075. Kathmandu: Law Books Management Committee.

• Higher Secondary Education Council. (1989). Higher Secondary Education Act, 2046 (Repealed). Bhaktapur: HSEB.

• National Examination Board. (2025). Letter Grading Directive and Study on the Effectiveness of Practical Evaluation. Sanothimi, Bhaktapur: NEB.