Part 1: NBA Pre-Qualifier 2025 Changes Explained – A Tier 2 College Guide
- Dr. Deepessh Divaakaran
- Apr 27
- 17 min read
Updated: Apr 29
For years, the NBA accreditation process for Tier 2 engineering colleges has been seen as a bureaucratic maze — filled with redundant tables, loosely defined criteria, and an over-reliance on interpretation rather than structured compliance.
But 2025 changes that a bit of it.
The new NBA Pre-Qualifier 2025 format — released as part of the revised SAR under GAPC Version 4.0 — is not just a policy tweak.
It represents a shift in philosophy: from subjective allowance to structured eligibility.
What was once a quick checklist has now become a non-negotiable threshold.
And that’s precisely where most Tier 2 colleges are stumbling — not because they lack intent, but because the new expectations are scattered across pages, formats, and assumptions.
Add to this the complexities of APAAR IDs, lateral entry logic, SNQ exemptions, and revised SFR math, and you're looking at a compliance trap waiting to explode.
This first part of our 4-part series — "Mastering NBA SAR 2025 Tier 2 Engineering: The Knowledge Series Every College Must Read and Avoid Consultants" — is written for institutions who:
Are planning to apply in the new 2025 format
May be confused between old SAR and new compliance expectations
Need clarity on what’s changed, what’s relaxed, and what’s become tighter
I’ll walk you through:
The new meaning of programs vs. allied departments
Why APAAR Faculty IDs are becoming critical
How to correctly calculate students and faculty for SFR and compliance
The updated Ph.D. percentage norms, HOD qualifications, and batch eligibility
And finally, a side-by-side comparison of the 2015 vs. 2025 Pre-Qualifier expectations
No jargon.
No generic checklists.
Just clear, applied insight to get you started the right way.
Let’s decode the gate before we enter the fortress.
1. Programs vs Allied Departments – Know the Accreditation Boundaries in NBA Pre-Qualifier 2025
In NBA accreditation—especially under the 2025 SAR for Tier 2 colleges—terms like Program, Department, and Allied Department are not just labels.
They are audit categories.
And a misstep in interpreting them can derail your SAR’s credibility and compliance scores before the real evaluation begins.
So let’s get this untangled from the start.
What is a “Program” in NBA Terminology?
A Program refers to a specific undergraduate degree for which your institution is seeking NBA accreditation.
Example:
B.E. in Computer Science and Engineering is a program.
It doesn’t matter if the same department runs multiple other UG programs — what matters here is: are you applying for this particular program’s accreditation?
What is a “Department”?
A Department is the academic and administrative unit under which the programs operate. It is the umbrella.
Example:
The Department of Computer Science and Engineering may run:
· B.E. in CSE
· B.E. in AI & ML
· B.E. in Cyber Security
· B.E. in Data Science
Even if you apply for accreditation only for the B.E. in CSE, the NBA will still view the entire department’s faculty resources (including AI, ML, Cyber, etc.) during evaluation.
What is an “Allied Department”?
These are academically adjacent departments that may share faculty, infrastructure, or course responsibilities with your main program’s department.
Example:
For the Computer Science Department, allied departments may include:
· Information Technology
· Computer Science & Business Systems
· Artificial Intelligence
· Data Science
NBA provides a detailed mapping of allied departments in Annexure III (Sample) of the SAR2-SAR-UG-EG-T2-14-1-202….
How NBA Assessors Interpret These During Evaluation
This is where colleges get confused.
So let’s decode it from the NBA assessor’s perspective.
For Faculty Count and SFR Calculation:
They count all regular or full-time contract faculty from both:
o The main department
o And allied departments offering UG/PG engineering programs
It doesn’t matter how many programs you’re applying for; if the faculty is part of the department or cluster, they must be counted.
Real-life example:
A college runs 3 programs under the CSE department: CSE, AI, and Data Science.
They apply only for CSE accreditation.
The faculty from AI and DS must still be included for SFR and cadre proportion calculations.
For Student Performance and Outcome Assessment:
NBA will only consider students from the program you’re applying for.
So, in the above example, while you compute faculty based on CSE + AI + DS, the student performance, graduation rate, placement index, etc., will only be taken from CSE program students.
This bifurcation is where most institutions mess up:
They either under-report faculty (hurting SFR) or over-report student data (skewing graduation metrics).
Checklist for Accurate Program Classification
Element | Must Include |
Faculty SFR Calculation | Faculty from main + allied departments (UG/PG only) |
Student Graduation Rate | Students from applied program only |
PEO/PO/PSO Mapping | Should reflect applied program’s specific curriculum |
SAR Tables (A8.1 & A9.2) | Should clearly distinguish department, program, and allied dept |
Capstone/Internship/SDG Data | Should be program-specific, not generic to department |
Key Takeaway: Program Classification
The NBA Assessor isn’t looking at just what you applied for.
They’re looking at what your department is — how faculty and resources are spread, and how accurately you've declared boundaries.
When in doubt, don’t simplify.
Be transparent.
Show the cluster.
Justify the count.
Provide clean, disaggregated data for faculty vs student matrices.
Caveat: Exclude Professors/Associate Professors of New Programs (Less Than 3 Years Old)
This is one of the most easily misunderstood clauses in the Pre-Qualifier compliance—and getting it wrong could lead to disqualification right at the entry gate.
As per the latest NBA Tier 2 guidelines (2025), if your department includes any UG Engineering programs that started in the Current Academic Year (CAY) or the previous year (CAYm1), then:
You must exclude Professors and Associate Professors appointed solely for these newly started programs when calculating:
The cadre requirement for Pre-Qualifiers.
The minimum requirement of having 1 Professor or 1 Associate Professor for the program under accreditation
However:
These faculty members are still counted for the total faculty strength when computing Student-Faculty Ratio (SFR) — as long as they are full-time, meet AICTE norms, and serve the department or allied cluster.
Real-Life Example:
The Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering launches a new B.E. in IoT in 2023-24 (CAYm1).
You are applying for accreditation of B.E. in Electronics & Communication Engineering only.
In this case:
The newly recruited Professor or Associate Professor for IoT will not be counted toward satisfying the cadre requirement of 1 Professor/Assoc. Prof. for ECE program.
But they will be included in the total faculty count for SFR calculation (as they are in the same department/cluster).
Why this matters: NBA assessors are trained to cross-check this detail using joining dates and faculty workload mapping. Overstating cadre compliance with ineligible appointments is a red flag and often leads to rejection during the pre-qualifier validation.
Key Takeaway
For SFR: Include all full-time faculty (as per NBA norms), even those from recently started programs.
For Cadre Compliance (Prof/Assoc Prof): Exclude those faculty from new programs (CAY and CAYm1).
Action: Maintain a faculty map by program with joining year and designation tags to justify inclusion/exclusion clearly.
This distinction strengthens your SAR with transparency and keeps your application audit-ready.
2. Faculty APAAR ID – A New Norm You Cannot Skip in NBA Pre-Qualifier 2025
Starting with the NBA SAR 2025 Tier 2 format, the inclusion of the APAAR Faculty ID isn’t just a digital addition — it signals the rise of national academic identity tracking.
While it's not yet made mandatory for rejection or acceptance, institutions that fail to submit APAAR IDs risk being marked “non-serious” during data validation and visit preparedness.
NBA has aligned itself with India’s growing One Nation, One Record initiative.
The goal?
To eliminate duplication, false faculty credentials, and ghost appointments — and to bring faculty validation under a single national ledger.
What is APAAR?
APAAR (Automated Permanent Academic Account Registry) is a unique 12-digit identification number assigned to individuals in the academic ecosystem, including faculty members. It serves as a digital repository of an individual's academic credentials, linked with the Academic Bank of Credits (ABC) and DigiLocker, facilitating seamless access and verification of academic records.
Why NBA is Asking for APAAR ID in 2025 Pre-Qualifier
Old SAR (2015) | New SAR (2025) |
PAN No. + Highest Qualification | PAN No. + Highest Qualification + APAAR Faculty ID (if available) |
The 2025 SAR introduces a field for APAAR IDs in faculty-related tables, such as Table B2.A and Table 5A.
Although currently optional, this move aligns with national initiatives to digitize academic records and enhance the credibility of faculty qualifications.
Institutions that include APAAR IDs in their submissions are likely to be viewed favourably during assessments.
How to Register Faculty for an APAAR ID
Faculty members can obtain their APAAR ID through the following steps:
Create a DigiLocker Account:
Click on "Sign Up" and enter your mobile number.
Authenticate using the OTP sent to your mobile.
Set a username and password to complete the registration.DigiLocker+2ABC+2National Academic Depository+2Careers360 School
Complete e-KYC Verification:
Log in to your DigiLocker account.
Navigate to the "Issued Documents" section.
Search for "APAAR ID" and select the relevant option.
Provide your Aadhaar number and complete the OTP-based verification.IIT Bombay+5Study Smart India+5Apaar ID+5
Enter Academic Details:
Fill in your academic information, including:
Institution Name
Designation
Department
Date of Joining
Highest Qualification
Generate APAAR ID:
After submitting the details, your APAAR ID will be generated.
The APAAR ID card will be available in the "Issued Documents" section of your DigiLocker account.
Documents Required for Registration
Aadhaar Card
PAN Card
Highest Qualification Certificate
Appointment Letter or Proof of Employment
Passport-sized Photograph
Assessor's Perspective
During NBA assessments, evaluators may request to verify faculty credentials. Having APAAR IDs readily available for faculty members can streamline this process, showcasing the institution's commitment to maintaining accurate and verifiable records.
Key Takeaway
While not yet mandatory, obtaining APAAR IDs for faculty members is a proactive step towards aligning with national educational policies.
Institutions should encourage faculty to complete the APAAR registration process and maintain a centralized record of their APAAR IDs.
Inclusion of APAAR IDs in NBA submissions reflects positively on the institution's dedication to transparency and digital integration.
3. Student Count (ST) – The SFR Math Colleges Often Get Wrong
One of the most commonly misunderstood — and dangerously miscalculated — metrics in the NBA Pre-Qualifier is the Student Count (ST) used in the Student-Faculty Ratio (SFR).
Many Tier 2 colleges either:
Inflate ST by including ineligible categories of students, or
Underreport ST due to lack of clarity on how lateral entries and leftover seat fills are factored.
The result?
Faulty SFRs, assessor rejections, and missed eligibility — even before the SAR is reviewed.
Let’s break it down step-by-step so your SFR math stands audit-proof.
What is ST in the Context of NBA SFR Calculation?
The Student Count (ST) is the total number of students in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th years of all engineering UG and PG programs in the department and its allied clusters.
But it comes with rules.
Formula for SFR Calculation: SFR= S / F−FFS
Where:
S = Total Students (ST) in the department and allied departments
F = Total full-time faculty in the department and allied departments (excluding 1st-year only faculty)
FF = Faculty with 100% load in 1st-year foundation subjects only from the Department.
How to Calculate the Student Count (S)
The value of S = DS + AS, where:
DS = Department Students (2nd to 4th year UG + PG students)
AS = Allied Department Students (2nd to 4th year UG + PG students)
Include in Student Count:
2nd, 3rd, and 4th year UG students in the program
1st and 2nd year PG students
Students admitted through lateral entry*
Students filling leftover seats*
* (up to 10% of sanctioned intake)
Do Not Include in Student Count:
1st-year UG students
Students admitted through:
Supernumerary quotas (SNQ, EWS, TFW, PIO, Foreign Nationals)
Multiple entry/exit schemes
Any non-engineering students (like MCA, BCA)
Rule for Lateral Entry and Leftover Seats
ST = SA + L
Where:
SA = Sanctioned Intake for the batch
L = Students admitted through lateral entry + leftover seats filled in 2nd year
(Maximum L = 10% of SA)
Even if more students joined through lateral/leftover, you cannot exceed 110% of SA for SFR.
Real-Life Example:
Let’s say your institution has:
Sanctioned Intake (SA) = 120
Lateral Entry + Leftover Seat Admissions (L) = 14 students in 2nd year
3rd and 4th year have 118 and 119 students respectively
Then:
Total ST for this batch = 120 (SA) + 14 (L) = 134
But NBA allows max 110% of SA = 120 + 12 = 132
So, final ST for SFR = 132, not 134
If you report 134, your SFR will be rejected as inflated.If you report 120, your faculty requirement may be flagged as short.
SFR Compliance Threshold
According to the 2025 Pre-Qualifier:
SFR must be ≤ 25:1 averaged over three academic years (CAY, CAYm1, CAYm2).
NBA will verify this by:
Validating S via actual admission and progression data
Cross-checking F via faculty profile, load distribution, and HR records
Key Takeaway
NBA isn’t just checking your numbers — they’re checking your logic.
Before you declare your SFR in the Pre-Qualifier, ask:
Are you capping lateral + leftover intake correctly?
Have you removed SNQ and first-year students?
Have you counted allied department students appropriately?
Are PG students included?
This one metric — SFR — can make or break your pre-qualifier. Don’t leave it to Excel guesswork. Follow NBA’s rules to the letter.
4. Faculty Count – Year-Wise Breakdown & Cadre Requirements
When it comes to NBA Pre-Qualifiers, one of the most scrutinized sections is faculty data — especially how you count them, what designations they hold, and which year’s data is being reported.
It’s not just about how many faculty members you have — it’s about whether they meet the right qualifications, hold the correct cadre positions, and were appointed through the proper process.
What Does NBA Require for Faculty Count Reporting?
Your SAR and Pre-Qualifier must report faculty strength separately for each of the last three academic years:
CAY (Current Academic Year)
CAYm1 (CAY minus 1 year)
CAYm2 (CAY minus 2 years)
For each year, you must classify faculty by:
Designation (Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor)
Nature of Appointment (Regular, Contract, Ad-hoc)
Association Type (Full-time, Part-time, Visiting)
Ph.D. Qualification (as per AICTE norms)
Assessor Lens: How They Evaluate Faculty Count
What Is Counted:
Faculty from main and allied departments related to the program
Regular and full-time contractual faculty (as long as they’ve served two consecutive semesters in the same academic year)
Faculty with AICTE-recognized qualifications
For Simplicity we can Say a faculty will be counted for a Academic Year (For eg. 2024 - 25) if they have joined the Department on or before 30th August 2024 of that Academic Year and Worked till 30th April 2025.
What Is Not Counted:
First-year-only faculty but Appointed in Department (if they handle 100% foundation-level load)
Visiting/adjunct/hourly-based faculty
Faculty hired for non-engineering programs like BCA, MCA, etc.
How to Handle Year-Wise Reporting
Each year (CAY, CAYm1, CAYm2) must be independently validated using:
Faculty joining records
HR attendance/load files
AICTE compliance report for that year
Proof of Ph.D. (if cadre credit is claimed)
Tip: If a faculty joined mid-year, only include them if they’ve taught for two full semesters in that academic year.
Cadre Requirement in Pre-Qualifier: What Has Changed in 2025?
Case 1: Single Program, No Allied UG Programs
· Minimum: 1 Professor or 1 Associate Professor with Ph.D.
· Must be available in both CAY and CAYm1
Case 2: Multiple UG Programs in Department or Allied Departments
· The program applying for accreditation still needs 1 Prof. or 1 Assoc. Prof.
· Each additional UG program in the department/cluster needs 1 additional Professor or Associate Professor with Ph.D.
· All must be regular full-time appointments
This cadre requirement is one of the most critical pre-qualifier filters.
Failure to meet this = Non-Compliance and immediate disqualification at pre-qualifier stage.
Caveat on New Programs: Exclusion Rule
Professors and Associate Professors appointed specifically for UG programs that are less than 3 years old (i.e., CAY or CAYm1) are not to be considered for fulfilling the above cadre requirement.
Reason: Those programs have not yet produced two graduating batches, so their senior faculty cannot be used to validate eligibility for other programs.
Example: If your department started B.E. in AI & ML in 2023 and you're applying for accreditation for B.E. in CSE in 2025:
Professors hired for AI & ML can’t be counted toward cadre for CSE.
They can be included in overall faculty count for SFR.
Worked-Out Example:
Let’s say the Department of CSE (including allied programs like AI, DS, Cyber Security) has:
Metric | Value |
UG 2nd–4th Year Students | 390 |
PG 1st–2nd Year Students | 36 |
Allied Dept Students | 384 |
Faculty (Regular + Full-time Contract) | 65 |
Faculty with only 1st-year load | 5 |
Then:
S = 390 + 36 + 384 = 810
F = 65
FF = 5
SFR = 810 / (65 − 5) = 810 / 120 = 13.5 (SFR)
Faculty Count Drives Multiple Pre-Qualifier Metrics
Metric | Driven by Faculty Count? | Uses Cadre Filtering? |
Student-Faculty Ratio (SFR) | ✅ Yes | ❌ No |
Cadre Compliance (Prof/Assoc Prof) | ✅ Yes | ✅ Yes |
% of Ph.D. Faculty | ✅ Yes | ❌ No |
Faculty Retention & Qualification | ✅ Yes | ❌ No |
Key Takeaway
The Pre-Qualifier is not just asking how many faculty you have — it’s asking:
Do they have the right degrees?
Were they appointed properly?
Were they present in both CAY and CAYm1?
Were they appointed for the eligible programs?
Accuracy + Traceability is the mantra.
Any mismatch between SAR faculty tables and HR files = red flag.
Prepare this data year-wise, designation-wise, and department-wise before submitting your Pre-Qualifier — it’s your first test of institutional seriousness.
5. Pre-Visit Qualifier Compliance – Side-by-Side Comparison
The Pre-Visit Qualifiers are not just a checklist — they are the first “gate” that determines whether your SAR will even be reviewed. If you don’t pass this stage, no further evaluation happens.
Below is a side-by-side comparison of the Pre-Qualifier elements before and after the 2025 changes.
Pre Qualifier Elements - Pre 2025 | Pre Qualifier Elements - Post 2025 |
Vision, Mission & PEOs. Are the Vision & Mission of the Department stated in the Prospectus / Website? ii. Are the PEOs of the Program listed in the Prospectus / Website? | REMOVED |
Whether approval of AICTE for the programs under consideration has been obtained for all the years including current year | Whether the approval of AICTE for the programs under consideration has been obtained for the previous five years, starting from the current academic year |
Whether admissions in the undergraduate programs at the Institute level has been more than or equal to 50% *average of the CAY, CAYm1 and CAYm2. | REMOVED |
Whether admissions in the undergraduate programs under consideration has been more than or equal to 50% **average of the CAY, CAYm1 and CAYm2. | REMOVED |
Whether faculty student ratio in the department under consideration is better than or equal to 1:25 average of CAY, CAYm1 and CAYm2. | Whether the Student Faculty Ratio (SFR) in the Department and allied Departments is less than or equal to 25:1, averaged over three academic years: Current Academic Year (CAY), Current Academic Year Minus One (CAYm1), and Current Academic Year Minus Two (CAYm2) |
Whether at least one Professor or one Associate Professor on regular basis with Ph.D. degree is available in the respective Department during CAY and CAYm1. | Case 1: If the Department/School is not running multiple UG (Engineering) programs and does not have allied departments, which are running undergraduate engineering programs, then the Department/School under consideration needs either 1 Professor or 1 Associate Professor on a regular basis with Ph.D. degree in the current academic year (CAY) and the previous academic year (CAYm1). Case 2: If the Department/School, including allied departments, is running multiple UG (Engineering) programs, the Department/ School under consideration needs either 1 Professor or 1 Associate Professor on a regular basis with Ph.D. degree in CAY and CAYm1. Additionally, the remaining UG (Engineering) programs (N*) need N Professors or N Associate Professors in the Department/ School/ Allied Departments on a regular basis with Ph.D. degree in CAY and CAYm1 in total. |
Whether number of available Ph.Ds. in the department is greater than or equal to 10% of the required number of faculty average of CAY and CAYm1. | Whether the number of faculty having Ph. D degree available in the Department & allied Departments is greater than or equal to 10% of the required number of faculty averaged over two academic years i.e. Current Academic Year (CAY) and Current Academic Year Minus One (CAYm1) |
Whether two batches have passed out in the programs under consideration | Whether two batches have passed out in the program under consideration |
6. Conclusion
In the older SAR formats, the Pre-Qualifier stage often felt like a formality — a gatekeeping step that many institutions passed by default, often with outdated templates and inconsistent data.
That’s no longer the case.
With the rollout of NBA SAR 2025 for Tier 2 colleges, the Pre-Qualifier has become a full-fledged eligibility audit — deeply linked to teaching capacity, academic continuity, compliance precision, and national policy alignment.
From faculty designation filters to APAAR ID integration, and from student intake exclusions to program-wise graduation maturity, every line you fill is being read not just as data — but as a story of your institutional credibility.
If you want to pass the Pre-Qualifier, here’s what you must internalize:
Understand the difference between Programs, Departments, and Allied Departments
Register faculty with APAAR IDs and maintain real-time records
Compute Student-Faculty Ratio (SFR) using the exact logic — not assumptions
Prepare faculty data year-wise, designation-wise, and program-wise
Exclude ineligible professors from cadre calculation if the program is <3 years old
Ensure your program has two graduated batches — no shortcuts here
The institutions that are going to thrive in the 2025 accreditation cycle are not the ones with the highest numbers — but the ones with the cleanest narratives and most accurate data.
What’s Next?
In Part 2 of this series, we go deeper into the SAR itself — not just what changed, but how the entire evaluation structure has shifted:
The new GAPC V4.0 Criteria
Revised marks weightage
Rubric-based evaluation for outcomes and sustainability goals
The increasing role of documentation and digital traceability
The SAR is where you tell your full story. But as we’ve just seen — the Pre-Qualifier is where the NBA decides if your story is even worth reading.
Let’s make sure yours is.
How My Book Solves What Revised NBA SAR 2025 Leaves Unsaid
Let’s be honest.
The Revised NBA SAR 2025 brought some good structural changes —
but it also left a lot unsaid.
No practical handbook.
No real-world implementation guide.
No structured support to help colleges actually apply the reforms.
And in that silence, most institutions today are left guessing.
That’s exactly why I wrote my book: "Outcome-Based Education – A Practical Guide for Higher Education Teachers"
Published even before NBA officially launched GAPC 4.0 and the New SAR in 2024.
Built not just from theory, but from on-ground experience of working with over 1000+ campuses across India.
What’s Inside the Book That the SAR Doesn’t Cover
How to Write Real, Measurable PEOs
Most colleges still create vague, theoretical mission statements.
My book gives you format templates backed by Bloom’s levels, stakeholder integration, and clear alignment with vision-mission-goals.
How to Map COs to POs (and Now to WKs)
SAR 2025 expects CO-PO-WK mapping — but doesn't explain how.
I do.
With ready-to-use tables, logical flow, and academic sense — not guesswork.
CO-PO Attainment Calculation (with Interpretation)
Not just formulas.
I explain the logic behind the numbers, how to set target levels, how to report attainment gaps, and how to plan corrective actions.
How to Create Course Files That Actually Prove Outcomes
No more decorative files stuffed with content.
I show how to build course files that speak the language of outcomes — files that actually satisfy NBA assessors.
Faculty-Level Understanding of OBE
One big SAR 2025 risk: If your faculty can’t explain the OBE processes they are following, NBA will mark it as non-compliant.
My book helps faculty internalize OBE — not just "prepare" for the visit.
Many more frameworks, templates, and real case studies
Covering real-world academic situations, innovative assessments, rubrics, student outcome analysis, and how to integrate SDG, PBL, and MOOC-based learning.
Why This Book Matters Now More Than Ever
If you’re preparing for Revised NBA SAR 2025 and you haven't yet adopted this practical framework, you’re doing it the hard way.
You can either keep struggling with interpretations, or you can build clarity, confidence, and compliance — by following a tested system that is already battle-proven in 1000+ campuses.
Grab the book now, and transform your NBA journey from guesswork to mastery.
Outcome-Based Education – A Practical Guide for Higher Education Teachers
(Available on Amazon, Flipkart, and select academic stores)
Get 20% Discount on Author Special Copy: https://www.deepeshdivakaran.com/buybook
Bonus Article: The Most Comprehensive Guide on PO Transition (12 POs to 11 POs)
While working on the SAR 2025 changes, one of the most critical shifts colleges must manage is the transition from 12 Program Outcomes (POs) to 11 POs under the GAPC 4.0 structure.
This transition is not cosmetic — it requires a full realignment of curriculum design, CO-PO mapping, attainment calculations, and reporting.
To address this, I have already published the most comprehensive and practical guide available today on this topic.
In this guide, you will find:
Why the PO structure changed and what it really means,
Step-by-step strategy for updating CO-PO-PSO matrices,
Practical transition mapping tables,
Common mistakes colleges must avoid during PO restructuring.
Access the Complete PO Transition Strategy Guide here: PO Transition from 12 POs to 11 POs – Complete Strategy Article
If your college has not yet restructured your CO-PO mappings to align with the new NBA SAR 2025, this article is absolutely essential reading.
Thanks for diving into this article!
If it sparked something within you, let's keep this momentum going.
Curious about who I am? Get to know me better: Click here
Interested in exploring what I do? Check out my work: Click here
Love thought-provoking content? Subscribe to my website for regular inspiration: www.deepeshdivakaran.com/subscribe
Want deeper insights into Outcome-Based Education? My highly acclaimed book is now used by 1000+ institutes—grab your copy at a special author price: Buy It Here at Special Author Price
Need detailed guidance on education policies? Download my free NEP 2020 Guides Download Now
Connect with me on Linkedin: Click Here
Have questions or want to chat directly? Reach me on call or WhatsApp at +91 8086015111.
Prefer emails? I love them too! Drop a line at mail@deepeshdivakaran.com.
Your thoughts matter. Let’s shape education's future together.
Stay Inspired. Stay Informed.
Comments