If we look for the secrets behind the success of some of Nepal’s successful community schools, we find a common practice among them—a combination of capable educational leadership, an inquisitive group of teachers, and active cooperation from parents.

Whenever there is a discussion about school education in Nepal or when a policy framework is being drafted, an important aspect is always left out. That is—the understanding, experiences, and problem identification of teachers who spend time with students in the classroom every day, along with the search for solutions to those problems. This raises a serious question: Are the ideas of experts with high degrees from prestigious universities around the world, but who do not understand the social and cultural context and mindset of local schools, students, parents, and communities, more important, or are those of teachers connected to the grassroots of school education? The question is not about individual qualifications—it is related to the fundamental philosophy of education reform.

School education is not just a scientific experiment conducted in a laboratory—it is a social process that is directly linked to the community, culture, language, family, economy, and local needs. Therefore, when making policies for school education reform, developing curricula, designing teacher training, or developing evaluation systems, it is essential to place the experience and understanding of classroom teachers at the center.

University degrees, research, and international experience have their own importance. They provide new perspectives, innovative practices, and comparative studies. However, no theory or model can be effective unless it matches local realities, especially since school education is even more closely tied to life and daily routines. There, a relationship of respect, trust, and emotional connection is formed between teachers and students.

In Nepal, policies related to school education, curriculum-related training programs, and reform plans have been prepared. However, in many of these processes, the participation of teachers directly working in schools has remained limited.

When making policies for school education reform, developing curricula, designing teacher training, or developing evaluation systems, it is essential to place the experience and understanding of classroom teachers at the center. Those who make policies, provide training, run projects, and consulting organizations have often remained distant from the real life of schools. In some cases, people who visit a school only once a year or have only read about society in books are presented as ‘education experts’. But they rarely get the opportunity to understand the daily struggles of schools, the workload of teachers, the number and condition of students in classrooms, and the expectations of parents.

The result of this is visible today. Many teacher training programs do not match practical problems. There is an imbalance between the curriculum and the evaluation system. Efforts to improve learning achievement have not been able to deliver the expected results. Therefore, what needs to be understood is this—the problem is not only with teachers, but also with the system that ignores teachers’ experience.

When studying successful education systems around the world, a common feature is found. There, teachers are not seen only as implementers or followers of instructions—they are also considered partners in policy-making and reform processes.

A school is not just a building; it is an important place for shaping capable generations. If education policies are made without understanding the social, cultural, and economic context of a community, they may look good on paper but will not succeed in practice.

For example, the problems of schools in Rautahat may be different from those in Myagdi. The learning challenges of students in the Himalayan region may differ from those of students in the Terai. Therefore, a single solution may not be effective for everyone. Only teachers and principals who understand the community can find solutions according to local needs.

The role of consultancy organizations or external experts cannot be completely dismissed. They can provide international experience, research, and technical support, but overall, they cannot provide complete solutions to learning problems. They can only play a supportive role, and even then, only if they have the right understanding of the context and background of the problem. Whether it is law-making or education policy—in the end, ownership must rest with the local community and implementers. Concepts imported from outside alone are not sufficient.

For a long time, a principle has been popular in the field of development studies—no decision made without the participation of the concerned community is effective. This saying applies even more to the field of school education. In this digital age, research, articles, lectures, and policy documents from the world’s best universities can be accessed within minutes. With a single search on the internet, one can read the views of education experts from around the world. But the knowledge gained by a teacher working in a village school from 15 years of experience cannot be found on Google.

Why does a student drop out of school? Why do some students, even after understanding the lesson, fail to take exams? How can a lesson be connected to daily life, and where and how can it be taught? Why do parents not want to engage with the school? Which local practices help in learning? The answers to these questions can only be found through daily practice. Therefore, a teacher’s experience is also a form of knowledge. And, in some cases, that knowledge may be more useful than a research paper.

The Way Forward
When reforming Nepal’s school education, the old mistakes must not be repeated. It must be ensured that the understanding of schools and communities at the grassroots is included in all important processes related to policy-making, curriculum development, teacher training, evaluation systems, and education reform. The Ministry of Education, universities, research institutions, and international partners must accept teachers not only as policy implementers but also as co-creators.

If we truly want to reform school education, it is not just state investment that is needed, but also the sense of monitoring and ownership that brings hope. Certificates from meetings, seminars, and workshops alone do not improve education; practical experience from the ground must also be included. Only when international knowledge and local experience complement each other will sustainable and effective reform be possible.