Authors : Dr. Koushik Ghosh

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 8 - August

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/4jjh8snm

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26aug1081

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : The Prime Minister's Schools for Rising India (PM SHRI) initiative represents an important attempt to translate the vision of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 into visible changes in school education. The programme places emphasis on strengthening school infrastructure, improving learning environments, supporting teacher professional development, promoting experiential and competency-based learning, integrating technology, encouraging inclusion, and developing schools that can serve as exemplars for wider educational improvement. The present study examined the implementation of PM SHRI through a comparative mixed-methods investigation of PM SHRI Kendriya Vidyalayas and comparable non-PM SHRI Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) schools. The study is conducted using data collected from 60 schools, comprising 30 PM SHRI Kendriya Vidyalayas and 30 non-PM SHRI CBSE schools. The quantitative sample consisted of 960 participants: 60 school heads, 300 teachers, and 600 students. Quantitative evidence was obtained through infrastructure and organisational measures, teacher responses, student-learning assessments, and school records. Qualitative evidence was collected through interviews and classroom observations involving selected school heads and teachers. The findings showed clear differences between the two groups. PM SHRI schools recorded higher infrastructure scores, greater access to digital and specialised learning resources, stronger teacher professional-development experiences, more frequent use of student-centred pedagogies, and greater classroom integration of technology. Studentlearning indicators were also higher in the PM SHRI group across Mathematics, Science, and English. Teachers in PM SHRI schools reported greater professional satisfaction and stronger opportunities for professional learning. At the same time, the qualitative evidence identified practical challenges, including limited preparation time, differences in digital capacity, maintenance requirements, and the need for sustained financial and institutional support. The study concludes that PM SHRI implementation in the participating schools is associated with improvements extending beyond physical infrastructure to teacher development, classroom practice, and student learning. However, because PM SHRI schools are not randomly assigned, the findings are interpreted as evidence of significant group differences and programme-associated changes rather than definitive causal effects. The study argues that the long-term contribution of PM SHRI will depend on sustained professional development, effective resource utilisation, contextual responsiveness, and the capacity of participating schools to share successful practices with the wider school system.

Keywords : PM SHRI, Kendriya Vidyalayas, CBSE Schools, School Quality, NEP 2020, Teacher Professional Development, Digital Education, School Effectiveness, Educational Reform, School Transformation.

References :

1. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
2. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute.
3. Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers' professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08331140
4. Escueta, M., Quan, V., Nickow, A. J., & Oreopoulos, P. (2020). Education technology: An evidence-based review. Journal of Economic Literature, 58(4), 897–996. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20191507
5. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
6. Fullan, M. (2015). The new meaning of educational change (5th ed.). Teachers College Press.
7. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
8. Kraft, M. A., Blazar, D., & Hogan, D. (2018). The effect of teacher coaching on instruction and achievement: A meta-analysis of the causal evidence. Review of Educational Research, 88(4), 547–588. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654318759268
9. Leithwood, K., Sun, J., & Schumacker, R. (2020). How school leadership influences student learning: A test of “The four paths model.” Educational Administration Quarterly, 56(4), 570–599. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X19878772
10. Ministry of Education. (2020). National education policy 2020. Government of India. (Education.gov.in)
11. Ministry of Education. (2022). PM SHRI schools: Prime Minister's Schools for Rising India—Framework and guidelines. Government of India. (PM SHRI Dashboard)
12. Ministry of Education. (n.d.). About PM SHRI School. Government of India. (PM SHRI Schools)
13. Ministry of Education. (n.d.). PM SHRI dashboard: Frequently asked questions. Government of India. (PM SHRI Dashboard)
14. Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
15. Robinson, V. M. J., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635–674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X08321509
16. Tamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011). What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning: A second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational Research, 81(1), 4–28. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310393361
17. UNESCO. (2020). Education for sustainable development: A roadmap. UNESCO.
18. UNESCO. (2021). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. UNESCO.
19. World Bank. (2018). World development report 2018: Learning to realize education's promise. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1096-1