Reform and role: Telangana’s structural dilemma in education policy

When advisory autonomy merges into execution, the oversight collapses into self-reference, the checker becomes the doer. By contrast, both Karnataka and Tamil Nadu maintained strict separation between commission leadership and operational groups. In Telangana, however, the commission’s chair now functions as a departmental convenor, potentially reducing his oversight role over other domains.

Whenthe government of Telangana announced the constitution of the Telangana Education Commission (TEC) in September 2024, it was seen as a bold move to chart a new path for educational reform in the state.

The commission’s mission to create a comprehensive roadmap from pre-primary to higher education promised both breadth and ambition.

As Telangana enters the implementation phase of its Education Policy (TEP), role overlaps, structural inconsistencies, and procedural lapses threaten to dilute the integrity of what was envisioned as a landmark reform."

A commission without sub-panels:

The TEC, headed by retired IAS officer Akunuri Murali, was constituted with only one Chairperson and three members, without any domain-specific subcommittees or research units.

This is in sharp contrast to national and state precedents: the Kothari Commission (1964–66) operated with 12 task forces and seven working groups, the Karnataka Education Commission (2023) created 30 theme-based task forces on school, higher, and technical education and Tamil Nadu’s Education Policy Committee (2022) established a 12-member high-level panel.

In Telangana’s case, the limited membership has restricted its capacity to deliver a comprehensive and cross-sectoral analysis. A commission without sub-committees risks functioning as a high-level advisory circle rather than a policy-generating institution.

The TEC has so far released only a series of thematic papers, on mid-day meals, private school fee regulation, and teacher education, rather than a consolidated policy framework.

Parallel processes, not sequential reform:

Even before the TEC’s comprehensive report could be completed, the School Education Department constituted 11 Focus Groups last month under the Telangana Education Policy (TEP) initiative. Each focus group, ranging from teacher education to digital learning and joyful classrooms was assigned a convenor, co-convenor, four members, and several partnering NGOs. However, the government’s memo (No.3338/TEP/SCERT/TG/2025) does not reference the commission’s ongoing work, nor does it specify a timeline or integration mechanism between the TEC and TEP initiatives. This reflects a break in the policy chain. The policy sequence has inverted. The report should feed the focus groups, not the other way around. The result is two parallel processes instead of one continuum.

Chairman as convenor-A question of hierarchy:

Adding to the confusion, the State Government also appointed TEC Chairman Akunuri Murali as convenor of the focus group on ‘Infrastructure and Joyous Learning Environment’.

While this move might reflect the state’s desire to leverage his expertise, policy observers opine that it blurs institutional boundaries and dilutes the autonomy of the commission itself.

When advisory autonomy merges into execution, the oversight collapses into self-reference, the checker becomes the doer. By contrast, both Karnataka and Tamil Nadu maintained strict separation between commission leadership and operational groups.

In Telangana, however, the commission’s chair now functions as a departmental convenor, potentially reducing his oversight role over other domains.

Governance gaps and institutional blurring:

Experts suggest that TEC’sstructural limitations and overlapping assignments signal procedural weakness rather than intent failure. While there is no legal impropriety, the design lacks the institutional layering required for robust reform.

A UNESCO (2023) policy brief on “Designing Education Commissions for Reform Impact” states that: “Effective commissions require inclusive membership, thematic division of labour, and autonomy from implementing agencies. Role compression undermines their strategic mandate.” Telangana’s current model, where the commission, department, and the SCERT-led PMU operate in parallel silos, risks producing fragmented recommendations rather than a cohesive state education policy.

What other States did right:

In examining how different states have approached education reform, we find that unlike Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, which treated their commissions as foundational to reform, Telangana’s focus groups have proceeded without waiting for the TEC’s comprehensive report, highlighting a critical gap in sequencing and structural coherence.

The path forward-Coherence over speed:

Telangana’s education reform journey reflects the state’s developmental ambition—forward-looking, consultative, and energetic.

Yet, as the OECD (2022) cautions, “Policy acceleration without institutional coherence can produce impressive activity but limited accountability.”

This tension is increasingly evident in the implementation phase of the Telangana Education Policy (TEP), where structural inconsistencies, role overlaps, and procedural lapses risk diluting the integrity of what was envisioned as a landmark reform. As one analyst aptly notes, “Telangana’s ambition is laudable, but its framework must reflect its scope.”

To recalibrate the TEP process and safeguard its transformative potential, policy specialists and education governance experts propose a three-pronged corrective approach. First, institutional integration is essential: the TEP Focus Groups must be formally aligned with TEC recommendations, and the commission should be granted supervisory review authority to ensure coherence and accountability. Second, structural strengthening is advised through the reconstitution of the TEC, with dedicated subcommittees focusing on higher education, teacher training, and governance reform. Third, transparency must be prioritised by publishing a “Green paper on education reform in Telangana,” inviting feedback from academics, teachers, and civil society before the policy is finalised.

To fulfill its founding vision, the TEC must remain the compass—not a cart in the caravan it was meant to guide.

(The Hanumakonda-based writer is the General Secretary of Society for Change In Education, Telangana)